And a reduction in our share price, like what alaways happens when telstra
is in court. You can tell Telstra is run by seppos. "We don't like what our
competition/ACCC is doing. Let's sue 'em". Get fucked James

"James Bell" <jamesbell@telstra.net> wrote in message
news:K18di.15151$wH4.12780@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> Legal battleground
> The G9 proposal relies on the Government confiscating Telstra's copper
> network, and then forcing Telstra to pay G9 to connect to it.
>
> This ACCC sponsored confiscation of assets on such a scale will inevitably
> get bogged down in constitutional litigation for several years including
> multi-billion dollar claims for compensation by Telstra on behalf of its
> 1.6 million shareholders.
>
> Shareholders who had bought shares in T3 will also bring multi-billion
> dollar class actions against the Government in relation to the assurances
> and representations in the T3 prospectus to the effect that the
> telecommunications regulatory regime is considered settled and appropriate
> by the Government.
>
> Customers who had chosen Telstra as their network provider are likely to
> bring significant compensation claims against G9 and the Government in
> relation to the inevitable service disruptions.
>
> G9's proposal also relies on the Government agreeing to provide it with a
> legislated monopoly for 20 years - this is a gross distortion of the
> National Competition Policy which successive Commonwealth Governments have
> supported and pursued for over 15 years.
>
> This Government sponsored confiscation of private assets would also
> significantly alter the international investment community's perception of
> "sovereign risk" with investments in Australia. Such confiscation would
> put Australia into the same risk category as quasi-dictatorships around
> the world and would result in the diversion of significant offshore
> investment away from Australia. This will detrimentally affect the
> national economy, Australian business and all Australians.
>
> The Chairman of the ACCC effectively becomes a shadow director - who
> resolves disputes between the network owners and the manager, decides how
> to adjust prices, etc if an "Unanticipated Event" occurs. The ACCC also
> decides concepts like what is "Commercially Prudent". Clearly this is a
> conflict of interest, and unprecedented interference by regulators.
>
> The main players in G9 including SingTel Optus, Primus and financier
> Investec are all foreign owned and controlled entities who collectively
> will end up with majority ownership and control of Telstra's network. This
> would breach current effective foreign ownership limits on such Australian
> assets and, given the controlling interest of the Singapore Government in
> SingTel Optus, would also pose serious national security concerns for
> Australia.
>
> G9 would also involve complex legal joint venture structures between an
> unmanageable number of parties. Historically, legal structures with this
> number of parties either collapse under the weight of infighting or
> stagnate in perpetual indecision.
>
> Financially fails to add up
> G9's costings are flawed and their prices are simply unbelievable.
>
> Maintenance of the copper network is clearly costed far too low at $50m
> per year. How do the G9 plan to refresh and upgrade the network?
>
> No "National asset"
> G9 propose a "20 year life of investment" - in 20 years time we would
> still be stuck with ADSL2+ speeds of only 12Mbps to 20Mbps. We project
> speeds required in 20 years time will be at least five times that: 100Mbps
> to 1Gbps per household.
>
> G9's proposal demands a 20 year statutory monopoly to prevent other
> carriers from building competing broadband networks, so there's no
> encouragement for innovation, competition, or new investment.
>
> Other countries are already deploying fibre networks with speeds of up to
> 100Mbps. G9's proposal would relegate Australia to a 20Mbps cul-de sac,
> and Australia will be left behind as overseas competitors work even
> smarter and faster.
>
> G9's proposal spells disaster for rural Australians.
>
> Telstra's metropolitan lines currently cross-subsidise the rural network
> by hundreds of millions of dollars each year.
> This allows regional and rural people to have access to telecommunications
> services on the same terms as city people, despite actual costs being
> massively greater.
> Under G9's proposal, the subsidy disappears. Will rural services simply be
> left to decay? If not, who will pick up the tab?
>
>
>