will it go down?, page-24

The market share of telco you mentioned would be good, if they were all fixed wireless, but they arent. The majority are NBN. They havent actually announced when they intend on trying to move customers over from NBN, to their fixed wireless. So their % split of customers on Fixed Wireless remains lower than NBN, with a negative ebitda. There's no change in this from historical records to date. So at what year would you think that they would start to migrate customers over to their fixed wireless? given that most NBN customers would likely not want to enter into a contract, especially if they were being forced onto another product type.
I mean, is a telco even allowed to force a customer off the NBN if they want to stay on the NBN and are fine with it?
People are assuming that the NBN is completely rubbish and that the customers will be better off on their fixed wireless. wouldn't they only want to change if they had problems?
This then keeps their trends in the continued direction of a negative ebitda, especially with their extremely low NBN margins.

The 5g spectrum thing; research from seeing what other telcos have been testing and what is then expected in real life. I mean, if telstra claims they can do 5gbps total in best case testing, the likely speed is lower than that when it is used in real world.
NBN trialed something like 1.1gbps sometime ago with their fixed wireless(link below)
https://www.nbnco.com.au/corporate-information/media-centre/media-statements/nbn-hits-record-gigabit-speeds-in-fixed-wireless-trial
, but no one remotely gets even 100mbps and they actually deliver significantly less when looking at the complaints about their fixed wireless.
These are both large telcos that have over sold and under delivered on historical data.
What makes pentanet any different, with 1/5 of what telstra has bought, capable of achieving "multi gigabit"(what they said they will be able to do with this 5g spectrum they bought).
Telstra's already published what they have been testing already as well.
I think that because of what history has shown with telcos of above and what to expect in real life, it may likely be some hundreds of mbps, but not 'gigabit'. They will likely achieve 'gigabit' to customers that are directly connected to towers with fibre going to them. That's because the 60ghz terragraph equipment uses more than 1000mhz for linking the customers up. Terragraph equipment online mentions using 2160MHz wide of 60ghz spectrum, in order to do 'multi gigabit'.
So if you need 1000mhz or more to do gigabit+, what do you think 200mhz will provide?

Coming from an IT background, i will break it down like this:
10gbps = tower. Lots of capacity.
if going directly over terragraph 60ghz, customer will be able to get gigabit. 2160mhz wide of spectrum.
If going via this 26ghz (200mhz wide), before going to 60ghz (2160mhz wide), this speed is limited by the 26ghz link, because it has less capacity.

If you know how to tinker with your home wifi, do a simple test. Change the width of your wifi channel size to something smaller and see how much that slows your wifi down. Now think, hundreds or thousands of people are going to share that small amount. Think they will still get gigabit now?