DYOR but I think they just cannot directly compete ie advertise that their 4G for example is a substitute for fibre.
So they'll just keep on developing and improving their wireless network, dominate mobiles as they already do and then when wireless gets quicker, many more people will desert fibre and go 100% wireless.
Then the taxpayers will be stuck with a bloated, inefficient government owned monopoly which cannot innovate, cannot compete and cannot sustain itself without either raising prices and / or being sold off to private hands at a massive discount.
Ala any of the other previous privatisations by governments of both sides.
Then the taxpayers will lose out as they always do, through either paying monopoly prices and suffering poor service, then losing their investment when the government flogs it off, actually losing twice becuase they buy back what they already owned!
The perfect scam.
- Forums
- Political Debate
- telstra's no compete clause
telstra's no compete clause, page-2
- There are more pages in this discussion • 7 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Featured News
Featured News
The Watchlist
BGD
BARTON GOLD HOLDINGS LIMITED
Alex Scanlon, Managing Director & CEO
Alex Scanlon
Managing Director & CEO
SPONSORED BY The Market Online