It is currently "Wild West Week" on Masterchef Australia. It seems this has inspired some others from WA to get in on the act.
iiNet regulatory boss Steve Dalby decided it was a good day to tell the management of NBN Co exactly what he thought of them....or at least to tell the AFR's David Ramli.
He is reported to have said;
If they don’t get their shit together, we will just happily go about our business and do our own thing. NBN Co’s attitude is very dictatorial, it’s very public service and it’s very ‘take it or leave it’. It’s just surprising they have this attitude when you can actually leave it.
NBN Co needs us more than we need them and that is not portrayed in any way by their attitude. If nobody signs their [wholesale broadband agreement] and nobody agrees with their SAU and they have no success as a business then they’re f---ed.
He certainly bested former communications minister Stephen Conroy who had only dropped the f-bomb at the National Press Club in December 2011, and a "shit" when he realised he was late for Question Time at a press conference on the media reforms in March 2013. Dalby apparently managed both in the one on the record interview.
Of course, most of this is bluster - the typical stuff of which all negotiations are made. But it is also a bit delusional. NBN Co just needs one service provider to call iiNet's bluff. It will be a very hard "access strike" to pull off. And as the figures on take-up provided to Senate Estimates in May show take-up is faster in the areas being switched on now. Not marketing to these customers doesn't sound like a good idea.
The other question is exactly what iiNet means by "do their own thing". Apart from the access networks they bought with Transact iiNet has never done its own thing - it has used Telstra's copper lines.
There is a rule in the strategy business that if you want to make a threat - make it a credible one.
There were plenty of other ways for iiNet to make its pre-emptive strike about a document to be released by the ACCC that day (and it now has been).
Maybe Steve was just competing with his boss in a "most outrageous claim of the week" competition.
In a piece in the AFR that deserves a blog post all of its own, Malone was said to have called for [new Minister] Mr Albanese to allow NBN Co to run fibre optic cabling to the basement of apartment buildings instead of connecting every single unit – a move the Coalition has already pledged to do if it wins power. “That’s a change they can make literally overnight and it would mean you could commit to putting 15-to-20 per cent of Australians onto the NBN next year,” he apparently said.
Given that NBN Co will complete the rollout to 12 million premises by 2021, and that it is in 2013 at 200,000 it is already planning to do about 12.5% per year.
Some 30% of premises are MDUs, but they are not all in clusters so you still have to do most of the fibre rollout work for the whole area in which the MDU sits. And even if you decide only to roll the fibre to the MDUs, you still need to do the full design work for the whole area in which the MDU sits.
But also the average size of MDUs is eight units. As outlined at the JCNBN the issue is that once you realise that the project savings aren't that great. And if we don't take fibre to the unit now...when do we? The argument of "let them use copper" is a bit like arguing that all the workmen's cottages (now called terrace houses) built in the 19th century should never have been connected to electricity - after all they had gas, and no internal wiring.
Telco policy discussion has never been renowned for consistency or logic of argument. Once upon a time though the journalist involved might have thought to challenge the comment - not merely repeat it because it suited the masthead's editorial line.
(That said - Steve is just as right to push the interests of his company as NBN Co is in acting in the interests of its shareholders (us), Mike is right to suggest the company should always be pushed by the shareholders to get the best outcome, and David is right to want to get column inches under his byline. But unfortunately all of this doesn't result in considered policy analysis.)
Thursday, July 04, 2013
Tuesday, July 02, 2013
Telcos and trust
It has been an interesting time in telco land recently. It is impossible not to notice that telcos are rediscovering consumer trust as an important lever in delivering financial results.
One can see this in the extent to which customer service features in recent presentations. Improving customer satisfaction was the first of the four strategies listed by Telstra in its Investor Day presentation in October.
Optus' Kevin Russell titled his recent AICC adress Transforming Customer Experience. In that speech he said " Standards of service in Australia relative to standards of service that I'd seen change in the UK, just seem to, in my view, have gone backwards."
Optus also released research on Customer Service: Perceptions & Expectations. The research showed negative advocacy scores for the telco sector - that is assumed to be a measure similar to the Net Promoter Score.
Vodafone's Bill Morrow was more direct in comments reported by The Australian. He said "2013 is all about trying to earn back trust.." He added "Mr Morrow's presentation outlined a journey for Vodafone from "low trust" in 2011 to "most trusted" by the end of the year."
All these comments came to mind when today I read an item from the UK about Sainsbury becoming an MVNO. In part the report read:
Called Mobile by Sainsbury's, the service is due to launch this summer and aims to remove what it claims is the stress of choosing a suitable mobile tariff.
"Our customers trust us to provide top quality products and service at fair prices, and Mobile by Sainsbury's feels like a natural extension of our brand as well as a great way to reward our customers," said Luke Jensen, group development director at Sainsbury's, in a statement.
There is that word "trust" again.
Students of marketing, and more specifically the real science of markets that is economics, know how important brand and trust are in the context of markets with assymetric information.
The strategy in the Sainsbury case is to try to take the brand value from retail to mobile, in a belief that the brand value can withstand the negative effect of the telcos.
The practical reality seems to be from telcos however that the negative effect of the mobile ecosystem will damage any brand.
There is an alternative route for telcos which is to reduce the extent of the information assymetry.
(Technically I think there are three responses to the market for lemons. The first is to remove the information assymetry. The second is to provide a warranty against the negative outcomes. The third is building trust as a supplier. Clearly both the first two can be used as part of building the third.)
One of the most important questions is whether this problem really can be solved by each telco alone or whether there is an over-arching issue that requires co-operation. I touched on this in a TJA article in 2010. I also addressed the issue of why competition doesn't necessarily result in improved customer service in a submission to the ACMA.
The signs are there that the three mobile network owners in Australia understand the dimension of the problem. If they think the value in the response is only in a battle for market share then there will be no co-operative action. But if they recognise that the outcome can be increasing the perceived value of their product there might be a different approach.
One can see this in the extent to which customer service features in recent presentations. Improving customer satisfaction was the first of the four strategies listed by Telstra in its Investor Day presentation in October.
Optus' Kevin Russell titled his recent AICC adress Transforming Customer Experience. In that speech he said " Standards of service in Australia relative to standards of service that I'd seen change in the UK, just seem to, in my view, have gone backwards."
Optus also released research on Customer Service: Perceptions & Expectations. The research showed negative advocacy scores for the telco sector - that is assumed to be a measure similar to the Net Promoter Score.
Vodafone's Bill Morrow was more direct in comments reported by The Australian. He said "2013 is all about trying to earn back trust.." He added "Mr Morrow's presentation outlined a journey for Vodafone from "low trust" in 2011 to "most trusted" by the end of the year."
All these comments came to mind when today I read an item from the UK about Sainsbury becoming an MVNO. In part the report read:
Called Mobile by Sainsbury's, the service is due to launch this summer and aims to remove what it claims is the stress of choosing a suitable mobile tariff.
"Our customers trust us to provide top quality products and service at fair prices, and Mobile by Sainsbury's feels like a natural extension of our brand as well as a great way to reward our customers," said Luke Jensen, group development director at Sainsbury's, in a statement.
There is that word "trust" again.
Students of marketing, and more specifically the real science of markets that is economics, know how important brand and trust are in the context of markets with assymetric information.
The strategy in the Sainsbury case is to try to take the brand value from retail to mobile, in a belief that the brand value can withstand the negative effect of the telcos.
The practical reality seems to be from telcos however that the negative effect of the mobile ecosystem will damage any brand.
There is an alternative route for telcos which is to reduce the extent of the information assymetry.
(Technically I think there are three responses to the market for lemons. The first is to remove the information assymetry. The second is to provide a warranty against the negative outcomes. The third is building trust as a supplier. Clearly both the first two can be used as part of building the third.)
One of the most important questions is whether this problem really can be solved by each telco alone or whether there is an over-arching issue that requires co-operation. I touched on this in a TJA article in 2010. I also addressed the issue of why competition doesn't necessarily result in improved customer service in a submission to the ACMA.
The signs are there that the three mobile network owners in Australia understand the dimension of the problem. If they think the value in the response is only in a battle for market share then there will be no co-operative action. But if they recognise that the outcome can be increasing the perceived value of their product there might be a different approach.
Monday, July 01, 2013
Ministers for Communications
The swearing in today of Anthony Albanese as Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy saw some tweeting about the longevity of Senator Conroy and contrasting it with the churn in the portfolio in the Hawke Government.
So I thought I'd share my table of Ministers for Communication since Federation.
As "postal, telegraphic and other like services" are a Federal responsibility under the constitution the Post-Master General was a portfolio from the very start.
Anthony Albanese is not the first Deputy Prime Minister to be the communications minister. Lance Barnard was both in the two man Whitlam ministry
from 5 to 19 December 1972. Lionel Bowen
was Post-Master General under Whitlam and subsequently served as DPM under
Hawke.
John McEwen was the first Minister to be
commissioned as Deputy Prime Minister in the Gorton Ministry on 10.1.1968. Previously it was used unofficially for the
second highest ranking Minister. (but none of them were the Postmaster General).
The full list is:
So I thought I'd share my table of Ministers for Communication since Federation.
As "postal, telegraphic and other like services" are a Federal responsibility under the constitution the Post-Master General was a portfolio from the very start.
The
initial ministries (1.1.1901- 12.7.1915) were constituted of PM, Minister
for External Affairs, Minister for Home Affairs, Treasurer, Minister for
Trade and Customs, Minister for Defence, Postmaster-General,
Vice-President of the Executive-Council, Minister (without portfolio). The Minister with responsibility for
posts and telegraphs is therefore one of six that could have a list of
Ministers since Federation.
|
Ministry
|
Dates
|
Minister
|
Dates
|
|
|
|
Postmaster-General
|
|
|
Barton Ministry (Protectionist)
|
1.1.1901 – 24.9.1903
|
Forrest,
J
|
1.1.1901-17.1.1901
|
|
|
|
Drake,
Senator JG
|
5.2.1901-10.8.1903
|
|
|
|
Fysh,
PO
|
10.8.1903
-24.9.1903
|
|
Deakin Ministry (Protectionist)
|
24.9.1903 – 27.4.1904
|
Fysh, PO
|
24.9.1903 – 27.4.1904
|
|
Watson Ministry (ALP)
|
27.4.1904 – 17.8.1904
|
Mahon, H
|
27.4.1904 – 17.8.1904
|
|
Reid–McLean Ministry (Free Trade –
Protectionist Coalition)
|
18.8.1904 – 5.7.1905
|
Smith, S (FT)
|
18.8.1904 – 5.7.1905
|
|
Deakin Ministry (Protectionist)
|
5.7.1905 – 13.11.1908
|
Chapman,
A
|
5.7.1905-30.7.1907
|
|
|
|
Mauger,
S
|
30.7.1907-13.11.1908
|
|
Fisher Ministry (ALP)
|
13.11.1908 – 2.6.1909
|
Thomas, J
|
13.11.1908 – 2.6.1909
|
|
Deakin Ministry (Protectionist – Free
Trade – Tariff Reform Coalition)
|
2.6.1909 – 29.4.1910
|
Quick, J (PROT)
|
2.6.1909 – 29.4.1910
|
|
Fisher Ministry (ALP)
|
29.4.1910 – 24.6.1913
|
Thomas, J
|
29.4.1910-14.10.1911
|
|
|
|
Frazer, CE
|
14.10.1911-24.6.1913
|
|
Cook Ministry (LIB)
|
24.6.1913 – 17.9.1914
|
Wynne, A
|
24.6.1913 – 17.9.1914
|
|
Fisher Ministry (ALP)
|
17.9.1914 – 27.10.1915
|
Spence, WG
|
17.9.1914 – 27.10.1915
|
|
Hughes Ministry (ALP)
|
27.10.1915 – 14.11.1916
|
Webster, W
|
27.10.1915 – 14.11.1916
|
|
Hughes Ministry (National Labour)
|
14.11.1916 – 17.2.1917
|
Webster, W
|
14.11.1916 – 17.2.1917
|
|
Hughes Ministry (Nationalist)
|
17.2.1917 – 10.1.1918
|
Webster, W
|
17.2.1917 – 10.1.1918
|
|
Hughes Ministry (Nationalist)
|
10.1.1918 – 9.2.1923
|
Webster, W
|
10.1.1918-3.2.1920
|
|
|
|
Wise, GH
|
4.2.1920 – 21.12.1921
|
|
|
|
Poynton, A
|
21.12.1921 – 5.2.1923
|
|
Bruce–Page Ministry (Nationalist – CP
Coalition)
|
9.2.1923 – 22.10.1929
|
Gibson, WG (CP)
|
9.2.1923 – 22.10.1929
|
|
Scullin Ministry (ALP)
|
22.10.1929 – 6.1.1932
|
Lyons, JA
|
22.10.1929 – 4.2.1931
|
|
|
|
Green, AE
|
4.2.1931-6.1.1932
|
|
Lyons Ministry (UAP)
|
6.1.1932 – 9.11.1934
|
Fenton, JE
|
6.1.1932-13.10.1932
|
|
|
|
Parkhill, RA
|
13.10.1932 – 12.10.1934
|
|
|
|
McLachlan, Senator AJ
|
12.10.1934 – 9.11.1934
|
|
Lyons Ministry (UAP–CP Coalition)
|
9.11.1934 – 7.11.1938
|
McLachlan, Senator AJ
|
9.11.1934 – 7.11.1938
|
|
Lyons Ministry (UAP–CP Coalition)
|
7.11.1938 – 7.4.1939
|
Cameron, AG (CP)
|
7.11.1938 – 7.4.1939
|
|
Page Ministry (CP–UAP Coalition)
|
7.4.1939 – 26.4.1939
|
Cameron, AG (CP)
|
7.4.1939 – 26.4.1939
|
|
Menzies Ministry (UAP)
|
26.4.1939 – 14.3.1940
|
Harrison, EJ
|
26.4.1939 – 14.3.1940
|
|
Menzies Ministry (UAP–CP Coalition)
|
14.3.1940 – 28.10.1940
|
Thorby, HVC (CP)
|
14.3.1940 – 28.10.1940
|
|
Menzies Ministry (UAP–CP Coalition)
|
28.10.1940 – 29.8.1941
|
McLeay, Senator G
|
28.10.1940-26.6.1941
|
|
|
|
Collins, TJ (CP)
|
26.6.1941-29.8.1941
|
|
Fadden Ministry (UAP–CP Coalition)
|
29.8.1941 – 7.10.1941
|
Collins, TJ (CP)
|
29.8.1941 – 7.10.1941
|
|
Curtin Ministry (ALP)
|
7.10.1941 – 21.9.1943
|
Ashley, Senator WP
|
7.10.1941 – 21.9.1943
|
|
Curtin Ministry (ALP)
|
21.9.1943 – 6.7.1945
|
Ashley, WP (SENATOR?)
|
21.9.1943 – 6.7.1945
|
|
Forde Ministry (ALP)
|
6.7.1945 – 13.7.1945
|
Cameron, Senator D
|
6.7.1945 – 13.7.1945
|
|
Chifley Ministry (ALP)
|
13.7.1945 – 1.11.1946
|
Cameron, Senator D
|
13.7.1945 – 1.11.1946
|
|
Chifley Ministry (ALP)
|
1.11.1946 – 19.12.1949
|
Cameron, Senator D
|
1.11.1946 – 19.12.1949
|
|
Menzies Ministry (LIB–CP Coalition)
|
19.12.1949 – 11.5.1951
|
Anthony, HL (CP)
|
19.12.1949 – 11.5.1951
|
|
Menzies Ministry (LIB–CP Coalition)
|
11.5.1951 – 11.1.1956
|
Anthony, HL (CP)
|
11.5.1951 – 11.1.1956
|
|
Menzies Ministry (LIB–CP Coalition)
|
11.1.1956 – 10.12.1958
|
Davidson, CW (CP)
|
11.1.1956 – 10.12.1958
|
|
Menzies Ministry (LIB–CP Coalition)
|
10.12.1958 – 18.12.1963
|
Davidson, CW (CP)
|
10.12.1958 – 18.12.1963
|
|
Menzies Ministry (LIB–CP Coalition)
|
18.12.1963 – 26.1.1966
|
Hulme, AS
|
18.12.1963 – 26.1.1966
|
|
Holt Ministry (LIB–CP Coalition)
|
26.1.1966 – 14.12.1966
|
Hulme, AS
|
26.1.1966 – 14.12.1966
|
|
Holt Ministry (LIB–CP Coalition)
|
14.12.1966 – 19.12.1967
|
Hulme, AS
|
14.12.1966 – 19.12.1967
|
|
McEwen Ministry (LIB–CP Coalition)
|
19.12.1967 – 10.1.1968
|
Hulme, AS
|
19.12.1967 – 10.1.1968
|
|
Gorton Ministry (LIB-CP Coalition)
|
10.1.1968 – 28.2.1968
|
Hulme, AS
|
10.1.1968 – 28.2.1968
|
|
Gorton Ministry (LIB–CP Coalition)
|
28.2.1968 – 12.11.1969
|
Hulme, AS
|
28.2.1968 – 12.11.1969
|
|
Gorton Ministry (LIB–CP Coalition)
|
12.11.1969 – 10.3.1971
|
Hulme, AS
|
12.11.1969 – 10.3.1971
|
|
McMahon Ministry (LIB–CP Coalition)
|
10.3.1971 – 5.12.1972
|
Hulme, AS
|
10.3.1971 – 5.12.1972
|
|
Whitlam Ministry (ALP)
|
5.12.1972 – 19.12.1972
|
Barnard, LH
|
5.12.1972 – 19.12.1972
|
|
Whitlam Ministry (ALP)
|
19.12.1972 – 12.6.1974
|
Bowen, LF
|
19.12.1972 – 12.6.1974
|
|
Whitlam Ministry (ALP)
|
12.6.1974 – 11.11.1975
|
Bishop, Senator R
|
12.6.1974 – 11.11.1975
|
|
Fraser Ministry (LIB–NCP Coalition)
|
11.11.1975 – 22.12.1975
|
Nixon, PJ (NCP)
|
11.11.1975 – 22.12.1975
|
|
|
|
Minister for Post and Telecommunications
|
|
|
Fraser Ministry (LIB–NCP Coalition)
|
22.12.1975 – 20.12.1977
|
Garland, RV
|
22.12.1975 – 6.2.1976
|
|
|
|
Robinson, EL
|
6.2.1976 - 20.12.1977
|
|
Fraser Ministry (LIB–NCP Coalition)
|
20.12.1977 – 3.11.1980
|
Staley, AA
|
20.12.1977 – 3.11.1980
|
|
|
|
Minister for Communications
|
|
|
Fraser Ministry (LIB–NCP Coalition)
|
3.11.1980 – 7.5.1982
|
Sinclair, IMcC (NCP)
|
3.11.1980 – 7.5.1982
|
|
Fraser Ministry (LIB–CP Coalition)
|
7.5.1982 – 11.3.1983
|
Brown, NA
|
7.5.1982 – 11.3.1983
|
|
Hawke Ministry (ALP)
|
11.3.1983 – 13.12.1984
|
Duffy, MJ
|
11.3.1983 – 13.12.1984
|
|
Hawke Ministry (ALP)
|
13.12.1984 – 24.7.1987
|
Duffy, MJ
|
13.12.1984 – 24.7.1987
|
|
|
|
Minister for Transport and
Communications
|
|
|
Hawke Ministry (ALP)
|
24.7.1987 – 4.4.1990
|
Evans, Senator GJ
|
24.7.1987 – 2.9.1988
|
|
|
|
Willis, R
|
2.9.1988- 4.4.1990
|
|
Hawke Ministry (ALP)
|
4.4.1990 – 20.12.1991
|
Beazley, KC
|
4.4.1990 – 9.12.1991
|
|
|
|
Kerin, JC
|
9.12.1991- 20.12.1991
|
|
Keating Ministry (ALP)
|
20.12.1991 – 27.12.1991
|
Kerin, JC
|
20.12.1991 – 27.12.1991
|
|
Keating Ministry (ALP)
|
27.12.1991 – 24.3.1993
|
Richardson, Senator GF
|
27.12.1991 – 18.5.1992
|
|
|
|
Collins, Senator RL
|
27.5.1992 - 24.3.1993
|
|
Keating Ministry (ALP)
|
24.3.1993 – 11.3.1996
|
Collins, Senator RL
|
24.3.1993 - 23.12.1993
|
|
|
|
Minister for Communications
|
|
|
|
|
Lee, MJ
|
23.12.1993 – 30.1.1994
|
|
|
|
Minister for Communications and the
Arts
|
|
|
|
|
Lee, MJ
|
30.1.1994 - 11.3.1996
|
|
Howard Ministry (LIB–NPA Coalition)
|
11.3.1996 – 21.10.1998
|
Alston, Senator RKR
|
11.3.1996 - 9.10.1997
|
|
|
|
Minister for Communications, the
Information Economy and the Arts
|
|
|
|
|
Alston, Senator RKR
|
9.10.1997 - 21.10.1998
|
|
|
|
Minister for Communications,
Information Technology and the Arts
|
|
|
Howard Ministry (LIB–NPA Coalition)
|
21.10.1998 – 26.11.2001
|
Alston, Senator RKR
|
21.10.1998 – 26.11.2001
|
|
Howard Ministry (LIB - NPA* Coalition)
|
26.11.2001 - 26.10.2004
|
Alston, Senator RKR
|
26.11.2001 - 7.10.2003
|
|
|
|
Williams, DR
|
7.10.2003 - 18.7.2004
|
|
|
|
Coonan, Senator HL
|
18.7.2004 - 26.10.2004
|
|
Howard Ministry (LIB-NP Coalition)
|
26.10.2004 - 3.12.2007
|
Coonan, Senator HL
|
26.10.2004 - 3.12.2007
|
|
|
|
Minister for Broadband,
Communications and the Digital Economy
|
|
|
Rudd Ministry (Labor)
|
3.12.07 – 24.06.10
|
Conroy, Senator SM
|
3.12.07 – 24.06.10
|
|
Gillard Ministry (Labor)
|
24.06.10 – 28.06.10
|
Conroy, Senator SM
|
24.06.10 – 28.06.10
|
|
Gillard Ministry (Labor)
|
28.06.10 – 14.9.2010
|
Conroy, Senator SM
|
28.06.10 – 14.9.2010
|
|
Gillard Ministry (Labor)
|
14.9.2010 – 28.06.13
|
Conroy, Senator SM
|
14.9.2010 – 28.06.13
|
|
Rudd Ministry (Labor)
|
28.06.13 – 1.07.13
|
Conroy, Senator SM
|
28.06.13 – 1.07.13
|
|
Rudd Ministry (Labor)
|
1.07.13 -
|
Albanese, AN (Deputy
Prime Minister)
|
1.07.13
|
There are a few additional quirks as follows:
- Minister
for the Media 12.6.1974 – 11.11.1975 (check Administrative Orders for
Responsibilities)
|
Minister for the Media
|
|
|
12.6.1974 to 6.6.1975
|
McClelland, Senator D
|
|
from 6.6.1975 to 11.11.1975
|
Cass, MH
|
- In
1982 the title seems to have undertaken a very minor change from
“Communication” to “Communications”
- During
the Hawke super-ministry of Transport and Communications there was a
period with a junior Minister for Telecommunications
|
Minister for Telecommunications and Aviation Support
|
|||
|
2.9.1988 – 28.3.1989
|
Punch, GF
|
|
|
|
6.4.1989 - 4.4.1990
|
Kelly, RJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- During the Howard Ministry, Senator Ian Campbell was Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts from 21.10.1998 - 26.11.2001, (I had recollection that Chris Pyne did it later but it does’t appear in the APH list)
- During
the Rudd Ministry from 1.07.13 there were in addition
Senator Kate Lundy, Minister Assisting for the Digital Economy
Sharon Bird, Minister for Regional Communications
Ed Husic, Parliamentary Secretary for Broadband
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)