Telstra's plans welcomed ... with a brick

Summary: commentary Whatever strategy Telstra announced during the strategic review of its operations last week was always going to be controversial. As the nation's former monopoly telco -- in a market where competition is not yet strong enough to be called robust -- any move Telstra makes affects the operations of dozens of smaller telcos.

commentary Whatever strategy Telstra announced during the strategic review of its operations last week was always going to be controversial.

Renai LeMay, ZDNet Australia As the nation's former monopoly telco -- in a market where competition is not yet strong enough to be called robust -- any move Telstra makes affects the operations of dozens of smaller telcos.

But Telstra's plans to replace its CDMA mobile phone network with a 3G GSM equivalent particularly seemed to irk its competitors, adding to long-standing tensions about the cost of access to Telstra's network hardware.

"Telstra's regional customers must be wondering why the company has been constantly spruiking CDMA only to now tell them it is being ripped out," said a fiery statement issued on Wednesday afternoon by the executive director of the Competitive Carrier's Coalition (CCC).

The industry group represents second-tier telcos like Macquarie Telecom and Primus.

"Telstra shareholders must be wondering why the company is trashing equipment so recently bought, rather than trying to recover some sort of return on it by selling what appears to be a perfectly acceptable network," said David Foreman.

The director also took aim at Telstra chief executive Solomon Trujillo's comments last week that Telstra's strategy required the presence of a "reasonable" regulatory environment.

"The plan required a government and regulator willing to endorse a business plan that looks like the last vestige of Soviet-era industrial organisation -- one giant monopolist and no choice for consumers," said Foreman.

The heat on Telstra was evident all week.

"Stand up for competition. And stand up to Telstra." was the headline on a full-page advertisement placed jointly in Friday's The Australian newspaper by almost all of Telstra's serious competitors, including Optus, Primus, AAPT and iiNet.

The ad -- which would have left the carriers out of pocket by tens of thousands of dollars -- told consumers not to trust Telstra and accused the carrier of "destroying competition to boost profits", issuing political ultimatums to the government, and in general playing bully.

In addition, Primus managing director Greg Wilson today said in speech notes delivered to the media pertaining to a talk given to a Melbourne lunch that he had heard the experience of dealing with Telstra's new management team described as "the business equivalent" of the popular movie 'Meet the Fockers'.

"Most of those who have come into contact with the new family seem to have been traumatised by the experience," he said. The event was held by the Service Providers Association (SPAN) event.

But while in some respects Telstra's competitors have a point, it should also be noted they too have their own agendas to push -- there's money to be made if the government harshly restricts Telstra's ability to control its own infrastructure.

A different view of Telstra's plans was provided by analyst firm IDC, which issued a report pointing out that the telco's plans were necessary ... even obvious.

"It appears Telstra's next-generation network (NGN) strategy was cookie-cut from those of incumbent operators elsewhere ... with highly innovative incumbents like Spain's Telefonica and France Telecom already commercialising NGN-based services, Telstra is now three years behind its peers," wrote IDC.

"Phasing out the CDMA network and replacing it with a 3G GSM network makes absolute sense."

The firm also supported Telstra's regulatory approach.

"The key to Telstra's success will be to balance a [tightrope] act by continuing to seek regulatory holiday while transforming the corporation from a multitude of operating units into one single factory that rocks rather than chalks," IDC concluded.

Telstra's plans attracted very few criticisms from the government or regulators, unsurprising given that both groups should have had some inkling of what was going on before Telstra informed the media.

Communications minister Senator Helen Coonan issued her own statement praising Telstra's plans, and calling regional and rural customers the "big winners" from the 3G GSM rollout.

In the light of these other reactions, it's beginning to look like Telstra's competitors are getting less traction with the powers-that-be than they could have hoped. And regardless of whether they're right or wrong about Telstra's actions harming competition, that's the battle they need to win to get the regulatory controls on Telstra they want.

This could all change, however, if Telstra pushes last week's wins too far.

Your writer has no doubt Trujillo's rendition of Frank Sinatra's "I did it my way" at a Telstra function earlier this week was a rare relaxed moment for the executive who will face a treacherous path negotiating the next few months.

What do you think of Telstra's new strategy? Is the telco anti-competitive or simply doing what needs to be done? Send your thoughts to renai.lemay@zdnet.com.au.

Topics: Telcos, CXO, Government, Government AU, IT Priorities, Mobility, AAPT, Optus, Telstra

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Talkback

1 comment
Log in or register to join the discussion
  • Ahh Telstra!

    Sorry Renai but I didn't read the article, rather skimmed the first few paragraphs. I find it hard to not be incensed when it comes to Telstra, the American led company, & immensely amusing that this company under the Gov'ts proposal to sell is attempting to do whatever it can to avoid fulfilling the services it was always meant to maintain.

    Why is it that we are about to be offered shares in a company for bits of outdated copper wiring that already belong to us? How is it that the Gov't gets away with selling copper crap to the people who already own this infrastructure?

    Remember that this infrastructure became Telstra's from Telecom Aus when the whole company was a Gov't enterprise. Mind you, it was a very powerful & successful enterprise but it belonged to us & then the Gov't began selling it in parts to us. And now they want to sell the one thing that in a very short period of time is going to be worthless. The copper infrastructure. Oh yes, I'm sure that there is much more than just the copper, but copper-based telephony will be replaced by wireless broadband in a pretty short period of time.

    Once WiMax takes over, & reading a little, plus a little study in this area precludes a little expansive insight into the system & for what my little study & interest has shown me is that Telstra3 will be a worthless share.

    I could be wrong; as has happened many times today for starters but on this subject I have a feeling that Australians who buy T3 shares will be just giving their money to the Gov't like tax. Nothing will be theirs.

    Once upon a time I was on the Telecom Aus bandwagon & felt that the giving in of pressure to allow Optus to have part of the share of the monopoly was done at the wrong time. Just when Telecom Aus were laying down fibre-optic cable, the boots were pulled off & Telecom lay there bitter & twisted & then went home with their bat (the fibre cabling). Mostly, the whole scheme was dumped unfortunately & so now we are left with copper "crap". The fibre at least would have been worth something.

    The other seriously annoying thing that occurred then is that Telecom dumped one of their biggest money-spinners. Their R&D was unchallenged in Oz at that time & almost every telecommunications company around the world was using technology built by this R&D group. Telecom invested something like 200 million dollars per year into R&D & devised some of the best technology at that time. We here in Oz were lucky enough to have one of the best telephone systems in the world. We didn't have to worry about connectivity between states like the USA which in some cases had problems connecting with neighbouring states. All gone! Ditched like the bad-tempered child who owned the bat & ball in a cricket match. The money-spinner died a sudden & terrible death.

    What's more intolerable about this childish response is that Telecom remains in a monopoly & abuses the position that was handed to them in the first place. There was no other competitor for them to not be in a monopoly.

    Once upon a time Telecom Australia were not just a good company to Australia. It assisted the Postal Service, when it separated from them, for many years until it could stand alone. In those days, Telecom were a great company & I for one was a very proud though ex-employee. Now-a-days, this great company is called Telstra & it is run by nasty little vermin, some of whom aren't even Australian. The company is so petty about an issue that they were charged to fulfil. To supply a usable & fair communications solution to all Australians.

    The type of thing Telstra have done to manipulate the over-seers to avoid fulfilling their role includes placing temporary booster aerials between towns when it was known the overseers would be checking a towns communications. I come from Broken Hill, originally & I know they did this there. Luckily for Broken Hill, they were caught out & were forced to make the booster permanent. I wonder how many other p
    anonymous