Telstra mocks Labor's broadband plan

[byso]

Telstra mocks Labor's broadband plan

Isn't it fun watching Bytho twitch and squirm?

More fun seeing you skate over a question that you don't want to answer 😉

I also recall you carrying on like a true pork chop after a bit of ribbing when Latham lost.

 

[Narcissus]

Telstra mocks Labor's broadband plan

a public company that is being forced and hounded to allow other networks to use their assets.

MB: so it's obvious from the last line that I wrote there that I'm not 100% knowledgeable about the goings on over the last few years. So, with that in mind, are you telling me that Telstra, now a-non government entity, paid the taxpayers back for the network infrastructure in the first place? That, really, is my main beef: they may be their assets now, but where was it that that public company paid for said assets? Where in the balance sheet is the line that says "and this is the amount of money we paid back to the taxpayers to reimburse them for all of the infrastructure that they paid for while Telstra was still government run"?

 

[Matabele]

Telstra mocks Labor's broadband plan

[quote author=Matabele]
Isn't it fun watching Bytho twitch and squirm?

More fun seeing you skate over a question that you don't want to answer 😉
[/quote]

Did Telstra pay for the infrastructure or the Australian common purse?

 

[ManlyBacker]

Telstra mocks Labor's broadband plan

a public company that is being forced and hounded to allow other networks to use their assets.

Every individual or otherwise that stumped up the money for Telstra shares in effect bought the assets that were on the shopping block. What was sold was the ongoing business of telecomms sales and the infrastructure to support it. The money received from the sale went back into general revenue, which in effect is the payment for the purchase of those assets.
The value of the asset was determined on the on-going business model, based on the dividend return (advised in the prospectus) available on the assets purchased and the market's perception of what that return should be, for example taking into account other telecomm company benchmarks worldwide.
Hope that helps.

 

[byso]

Telstra mocks Labor's broadband plan

[quote author=byso]
[quote author=Matabele]
Isn't it fun watching Bytho twitch and squirm?

More fun seeing you skate over a question that you don't want to answer 😉
[/quote]

Did Telstra pay for the infrastructure or the Australian common purse?

[/quote]

You've totally missed the point!

Labor is asking for new work from a private company then wanting to set the rules....... please

 

[Matabele]

Telstra mocks Labor's broadband plan

I guess they could always slap them with an anti-competitive case. Noone likes an abuse of monoply.

 

[Narcissus]

Telstra mocks Labor's broadband plan

Every individual or otherwise that stumped up the money for Telstra shares in effect bought the assets that were on the shopping block. What was sold was the ongoing business of telecomms sales and the infrastructure to support it. The money received from the sale went back into general revenue, which in effect is the payment for the purchase of those assets.
The value of the asset was determined on the on-going business model, based on the dividend return (advised in the prospectus) available on the assets purchased and the market's perception of what that return should be, for example taking into account other telecomm company benchmarks worldwide.
Hope that helps.

OK, well that does make a lot more sense, thanks MB. I'll be honest, I just assumed that when Telstra was floated, the money went to the company as opposed to the government...

 

[Guest]

Telstra mocks Labor's broadband plan

[quote author=tookey]
[quote author=clontaago]
Hey does anyone remember the name of that guy who was Prime Minister and lost his own seat. It shouldnt be too hard to recall, there have only been 2 in the history of our proud nation!!!!

I think his name was Johnny Coward or something along those lines.

The funny thing is that most people have already forgotten that he lost his seat and government. And anyway he wasn't the first prime minister to happen to and won't be the last. In fact there is always that possibility every time there is a labor prime minister.

But what we will always remember for the rest of our lives is Gough Whitlam being the only Prime Minister to ever be sacked by the governor general. How humiliating was that. I can see that being a record that will never be beaten.

And to think that the labor party has held Whitlam up to be some sort of god ever since is the biggest joke ever. Whitlam and his government were a government version of HIH.

God save the queen because no-one will save the governor general. This has been repeated a millon times since the seventies but why does the governor general need saving? I suppose just like another famous labor party saying - you can't have your cake and eat it to. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
[/quote]


That vein's starting to stick out on your forehead again isn't it 😉
[/quote]

Hey Gronky I bet you were giving your throbbing vein a good thrashing yesterday at the thought of Gillard being the first female in an acting prime minister position. Have you got a picture of her in the pime minister's seat as your screen saver? Our first female socialist acting prime minister. :wall:

 

[Matabele]

Telstra mocks Labor's broadband plan

so?