Infrastructure decisions. Grounded in economics.

Jim worked with an independent telecommunications infrastructure owner on adjacent growth opportunities and the process for developing them. He helped connect carrier needs and technology trends with the company’s assets, engineering capabilities and commercial relationships. The work considered opportunities such as shared site facilities, rooftops and in-building coverage, comparing their strategic fit, development needs and timing. Jim also contributed to an opportunity assessment framework and interactive workshop preparation that brought management and technical expertise into the discussion. The contribution provided a prioritised opportunity set and a disciplined approach to testing assumptions, allocating resources and reviewing progress.

Jim contributed telecommunications expertise alongside HoustonKemp to advice for the ACCC on NBN Co’s expenditure and service-standard costings. The work connected network and operating realities with the questions being assessed in the replacement module process. Jim is a named co-author of the public expenditure reports and the August 2026 service standards memorandum. His experience demonstrates the ability to work across technical, commercial and regulatory considerations within a specialist advisory team.

Jim led corporate strategy work on a major wholesale network access decision for a telecommunications provider. The work brought together marketing, technical, regulatory, legal, pricing and financial considerations as the company assessed the commercial implications of granting another operator partial access to its mobile network. His contribution was strategic leadership alongside the relevant functional experts. The experience demonstrates his ability to frame a decision that crosses specialist functions and connect the operational realities of a network with commercial choices.

Michael played a key role in developing the commercial case for an A$2.4 billion full fibre overbuild programme of a fibre-to-the-node footprint. His work centred on maintaining a focus on commerciality while connecting network investment options with the transition from initial rollout to optimising ongoing operation. He also developed modelling to examine the timing of migrating remaining copper-based users and decommissioning network nodes. This experience connects infrastructure strategy with the practical timing and economics of network transition.

Michael reviewed strategic investment options for a broadband operator’s hybrid fibre coaxial footprint. He combined economic and engineering analysis in models comparing further cable-network investment with fibre-based alternatives to meet growing traffic demand. The work identified circumstances in which capital could be redirected towards more attractive fibre investments. This experience demonstrates how technical network choices can be assessed through commercial assumptions, customer requirements and the long-term use of capital.

Michael assessed opportunities to improve the delivery and replacement of in-premises fibre equipment. His analysis supported a product strategy change enabling subsequent customer replacement of fibre network termination devices, with the aim of reducing future technician visits. The work connected product design and customer processes with long-term operating cost. It provides relevant experience for organisations considering how changes to equipment, service design and operating practices can reduce the cost of serving customers.

Thao provided financial analysis and strategic assessment in telecommunications, including benchmarking to inform a regulatory engagement supported by KA. Her work connected financial and operational evidence with the questions underlying a major expenditure review, helping develop a consistent basis for comparison and decision making.

In an earlier role at Telstra, Thao contributed to a study comparing capital intensity across telecommunications operators. The work examined international and domestic data, considered differences in reporting scope, and tested how market growth and competitive conditions related to investment levels. It also documented the limitations of the comparisons. The experience combines careful analysis with the commercial judgement needed to interpret infrastructure benchmarks in context and support an informed management discussion.