In 130 days [NSW/ACT/QLD/SA/WA] Optus 5G Home Broadband $70/Month Unlimited [Selected Suburbs] with 50 Mbps Guaranteed


As per the title, Optus is rolling out its 5G Home Broadband at 50Mbps guaranteed speed sometime in the middle of 2019 year. To begin with, it’s limited to few suburbs per state.

Good bye NBN.

PS. I am not in one of those listed suburbs!

Mod: Further info

  • As of today, a lucky selection of Optus customers in Canberra (who live in Dickson or Manuka) will have the opportunity to sign up to get a 5G home Wi-Fi service.
  • Optus says it has launched an additional live site in Sydney and 47 more sites are planned to be online by March this year.
  • Optus has opened expressions of interest today allowing customers to register their interest for 5G home broadband in certain areas of selected suburbs including 23 in NSW, 13 in Queensland and nine in the ACT
  • Optus will confirm that we have received your submission and will keep you updated on the progress of your Expression of Interest.

Related Stores



  • +15 votes

    No suburbs in Vic :(

    Would love to get this in Maribyrnong, where we aren't scheduled to get NBN until 2020 and even then it'll only be FTTN. I guess I should count myself lucky as someone who gets 14Mbit down on my ADSL2+ connection…

    • +1 vote

      have you checked if Uniti is in your area?

      • +2 votes

        Yes, I have been down a torturous road with them, where they initially told me they could service my area and then went completely silent…and when I followed up, they blankly said they couldn't service me and that was the end of it. Was pretty disappointing.

        • +1 vote

          their whole support and communication process to get a new service provisioned was also a massive, massive pain in the arse for me. but, I am really loving having 50/20. unfortunate you can't get it, and hopefully optus/telstra roll out 5g to you!

        • +1 vote

          Going to have to pile on as well, despite being told they could service my place, upon registering I was told they don't have enough openings for me to connect to. This was four years ago. I was told I'd be put on their waiting list and would be contacted when a slot opened up.

          I've contacted them once a year to check manually.

          Four years and nothing. I wouldn't be surprised if their clocks run on NBN time.


        I tried getting these clowns up and running in my apartment block in Fitzroy, was a painful process and eventually gave up and went to Telstra.


      You should, Im only getting 8Mbit down in Maribyrnong


      Have you tried regular Optus 4g?

    • +1 vote

      You're about 14x quicker than us :( The highest we ever got was 1.2Mbit down


      Have you checked for Telstra or Optus cable? Both are waving signup fees for casual plans at the moment.

    • +1 vote

      That's good enough, I get 5Mbit down on my ADSL connection which makes my gaming PC looks look useless because it will take more than two days to download a single game..


      I've been putting some clients who are in shit spots on optus fixed 4G. I think there are also residential plans, but the business plans give 500GB bandwidth for $80 a month from memory. Fairly sure it operates on the same spectrum as Vividwireless used to….2300mhz? or maybe 2400mhz. Anyway it's locked to one band I'm fairly sure.

      You'd be much better off on that compared to DSL. I have 2 sites with it so far, 1 in Keilor and one in Epping and both are averaging about 50 down and 10 up. Of course with wireless it flucates, but it beats ADSL with terrible copper pulling 6/0.7. One of the sites are even using voip over it with no issues so far. (FWIW I advised them this might not be reliable and it's their fault for signing a lease before checking if they could get connectivity lol)


        Does Optus not limit speeds on these home broadband connections anymore? I had vividwireless when I first moved in and it was absolutely terrible (5 down 1 up, at best).


      wow, 14Mbit is 7 times faster than my old ADSL. Pretty good, and great value too compared to NBN, i wouldnt even switch to NBN if it was available lol

  • +7 votes

    Once my suburb is covered I'll be jumping straight over.

  • +8 votes

    They should sort their 4G speed first. I am getting 0.5-10 Mbps in Pascoe Vale Vic after being told by the salesman it will definitely be around 40-60MBps

    • +4 votes

      They're not likely to spend any more money on 4G. Your speeds might improve when users start migrating to 5G.

      • +1 vote

        The upgrades to 5G include upgrades to their 4G as well.

        By the time the 5G fixed wireless service becomes active, there is likely to be more demand on the 4G. It will be at least 12 months until significant amounts of none fixed wireless traffic is on the 5G network.


      My Optus 4G is fine. Some places I get over 100 Mbps and in others just over 10 Mbps. It varies how far you are from your local tower since the signal attenuates more the further away you are. It also helps having multiple towers close, no only for fallback but for simultaneous connections which increases the overall speed.


      Optus can barely get any reception at a nearby park, not too far from Pascoe Vale too. Terrible. Voda is actually better.


        I tried improving my speed by selecting different bands but it is still crap. NBN should be here with a few weeks so that should will be a good alternative

  • +2 votes

    This or a dodgy copper wire FttN connection. Hmm…..

    • +11 votes

      Welcome to the internet in Straya.

      • +8 votes

        Fast, cheap, reliable.

        Pick 2. Unless you are a polly, then you get both fast and reliable at the taxpayers expense.

        • +63 votes

          Didn't Labor propose FTTH only and not FTTN?
          It was Liberals who didnt want it and spent more money to implement lousy FTTN and copper involved in fibre network to keep Telstra in control or business.
          Edit: Looks like Liberals are doing a great job in putting blame on Labor for NBN. It was one of the best decisions which Labor had and its so sad it was not implemented without any political game and in Country's interest.

          • +13 votes

            @Gaggy: Yes the original NBN plan from Labor was for > 90% of the rollout to be new Fibre (FTTH), to replace the old rubbish copper. The Liberals thought it better to sabotage our national internet infrastructure upgrade than let the Labor government get a "win" on the board. It will take decades to clean up the MTM mess that the Liberals made of the NBN. I hope people remember all this at the election this year.

            • +5 votes

              @zathras: I am not forgetting that and people will soon realize how important technology and connection is along with basic requirements like accommodation, food, water and electricity.

            • -5 votes

              @zathras: Labor's expectation as documented in successive revisions of the NBNCo Corporate Plan was that only 1% would connect at 1Gbps in 2026. That same 1% could almost certainly afford the cost of technology transfer. You cannot buy a retail 1Gbps plan today.

              Labor expected because of speed tier pricing that 50% today would be connected at 12Mbps. Interestingly the NBN wholesale price cuts since the Liberals formed government have meant that today significantly more people are on 50Mbps services. Reference ACCC NBN Wholesale Market Indicators Report.

              What you've failed to understand, but which Labor did understand is that most people aren't prepared to pay for fast speeds.

              • +3 votes

                @mathew42: But you don't build a network like this for the next 10 years. You build it for the next 50 years. It's called long-term investment. And I would pay for faster internet. The reason why many people would pick 12Mbps is because they neither understand what they are getting, nor what their needs are (based on my friends who are not IT-savy). They understand they don't like waiting and buffering, but they do not understand how to fix it. Of course all that got a whole lot harder with MTM (Me: "Can you log into your modem and tell me what speed your line is capable of? You are on FttN using copper and you don't want to pay for a tier you can't get?"; Them: "Whuuuut?")

                • -1 vote

                  @Make it so:

                  They understand they don't like waiting and buffering, but they do not understand how to fix it.

                  Except that buffering is being caused by RSPs purchasing inadequate CVC (1.71Mbps per user) not the last mile NBN physical speed (68Mbps average for FTTN). Netflix recommends 5Mbps for HD & 25Mbps for Ultra HD. Buffering would be worse under Labor's plan because CVC would still be close to $20/Mbps rather than the $8/Mbps that the Liberals have cut it to.

                  MTM occurred because techies were unable to separate their desires from what most people would be prepared to pay. If Labor had chosen to create a NBN with a single cheap AVC rate then today we would all have 1Gbps FTTP. Of course we would also have data quotas but then we have quotas for water and electricity.

                  • +2 votes

                    @mathew42: @mathew42

                    "Except that buffering is being caused by RSPs purchasing inadequate CVC (1.71Mbps per user) not the last mile NBN physical speed (68Mbps average for FTTN)"

                    Not in my case mate. My Kelmscott POI has plenty of CVC purchased by ABB:

           - pick Kelmscott.

                    The problem is I'm hanging off a Liberal NBN, over subscribed Fixed Wireless tower.

                    48Mbps 5:30am in the morning most days.
                    4Mbps after 6pm on a Sunday night, 6Mbps most other nights.

                    I'm not getting what I paid for. I did NOT vote Liberal. I think Mt Turnbull (who I've actually met and spoken to regarding this before they were voted in and telling him I thought it wasn't going to work at a meet and greet in WA) is a knob with hands in Rupert's pockets and no real concern for the future of free competition in the broadband data/IPTV space, or the future of Australia's communications.

                    Yes I AM bitter about what I now have (and a lot of others) so venting a bit, but it's not all about CVC capacity mate, the actual infrastructure sucks far more.

                    • -1 vote

                      @Ramrunner: If you are on fixed wireless then that is Labor's decision that has impacted on you. After Labor's 2007 election plan to roll out FTTN was thwarted by Telstra, Labor decided to save face by switching to FTTP. Areas that were deemed too costly for FTTP were allocated fixed wireless or satellite, while maintaining the copper for phone services. I argued at the time that FTTN in small rural towns would provide a better service than fixed wireless.

                      a knob with hands in Rupert's pockets and no real concern for the future of free competition in the broadband data/IPTV space

                      Lets look at some facts:
                      * The average ADSL2+ connection (11Mbps) is capable of 2 HD Netflix streams (5Mbps).
                      * 25Mbps meets the Ultra HD Netflix requirement
                      * Streaming requires high volumes of data, yet the Liberals reduced CVC pricing from Labor's $20/Mbps to $8/Mbps and bundled CVC with 50Mbps AVC

                      All of these suggest that Liberal NBN changes has made zero difference and potentially encouraged streaming by lowering data costs.


                        @mathew42: buddy..i haven't poor speed on adsl2+ right now and totally unreliable line just like my cousin right now change from TPG to optus and got worst, can't get cable…

                        this 5G thing if they able to guaranteed $50 for 25Mbps still good..comes down to reliability…

              • +4 votes

                @mathew42: Since you love slinging mud at Labor so much by spewing weird claims, I'll just link this before I head off to work:

                • -1 vote

                  @Strong Salad: One cannot dispute that FTTP is faster than FTTN which is what Lee Ridge argues. However this fails to take into account the impact of Labor's speed tiers. NBNCo have offered 1Gbps wholesale plans since December 2013. If NBN was converted to 10Gbps FTTP almost no one would be willing to connect at that speed and speed tier take up would barely change. If speed tiers were removed from FTTN, the average speed would be faster (68Mbps) than Labor's FTTP with speed tiers.

                  Labor predicted in the NBNCo Corporate Plans that <1% would be on 1Gbps in 2026 and that was before unlimited data plans became the norm.

                  Consider this average CVC is 1.71Mbps per user. A single 100Mbps user can consume more than 50 times that amount. If an RSP offers 1Gbps then a single user can consume 500 times that amount. If water wasn't metered people would leave the tap on. The internet isn't metered so people are wasteful. RSPs understand the economics of this.

                  None of this should be news to people who read Labor's first NBNCo Corporate Plan in 2009 and looked at Labor's expectations of speed tier take up. Changing technology hasn't altered that.



            Didn't Labor propose FTTH only and not FTTN?

            Wrong. Labor when to the 2007 election with a promise to build FTTN. It was only when Telstra wouldn't cooperate that FTTP was suggested to save face.

            It was one of the best decisions which Labor had

            Agreed, but unfortunately Labor didn't consider the benefits of offering 1Gbps to everyone on a fixed connection and instead designed the NBN with speed tiers and an expectation that in 2026 around 50% would connect at 12Mbps with <1% on 1Gbps. The NBNCo Corporate Plan.

            The reality is that if you are in the 1% who can afford the mythical 1Gbps speed tier, then the ~$10,000 for technology change isn't that much.


              @mathew42: "Wrong. Labor when to the 2007 election with a promise to build FTTN"
              Lol. U blame them for FTTN? I dont care what happened earlier, but they started it as FTTH for whole Australia. If they learnt lessons, why Teltra supported Liberals later… Does not make sense to me.
              Liberals cant hide with this garbage NBN has become and totally responsible for it without blaming others.



                Lol. U blame them for FTTN?

                I've never said I blamed Labor for FTTN, I just pointed out that Labor went to the 2007 election with a FTTN proposal.

                I blame Labor for speed tiers which hobbled FTTP with ADSL speeds. Labor documented in the NBNCo Corporate Plans released each year in the period 2009-2013 their expectation that speed tiers would result in 50% connected at 12Mbps.

                The reality is that MTM has only impacted on the few who could afford the faster speed tiers. It is almost certain that <1% who Labor expected to purchase 1Gbps speeds in 2026 could afford technology change costs.

                MTM has been positive for 90% of which 35% are on faster speeds thanks to the Liberals cutting CVC costs from Labor's $20/Mbps to $8/Mbps and bundling CVC with 50Mbps AVC.


            @Gaggy: turnbull and his mates with FTTN bs….huhahahahaha

  • +3 votes

    Username checks out.

  • +2 votes

    Hmm, sitting between three of those listed suburbs…

    • +1 vote

      im sitting just outside the suburbs… just signed up to 4G WBB because no one would offer anything better than ADSL2 to my home…

      5G would have been great.

      I dream of the day where we in Australia have internet speeds comparable to the rest of the world…


      Vic gets nothing. We are used to being treated like second-class citizens, but sitting right in between those suburbs listed as serviceable must suck. :-)


    I'm in one of the area's available but Optus 4g service is sketchy and not good now.will the 5g be better

    • +45 votes

      No, idiots are listening to telco industry hype about "5G" which is a marketing buzzword. The reality is it's about 25% faster than LTE at best with less range. And obviously being wireless service levels will be all over the place and the industry will have even more excuses to deliver customers shittier service levels.

      But morons like Professor Rodney Sims of the ACCC are confident it will replace fibre. Another example of the ACCC being against consumers by delivering them even shittier broadband and only there to enrich the largest businesses in Australia.

      • +4 votes

        ^ This so, so much.

      • +3 votes

        I agree but every new iteration has less range. It allows more towers, hence more total network bandwidth. It will be interesting to see how small a tower will become in the future.

      • +16 votes

        25% faster?

        4G speeds theoretically peak in the 1gbps range with latency of around 50ms. 5G has achieved 1tbps in test environments and is expected to be able to deliver 10gbps speeds, on the low end, once fully set up, at a latency of 1ms. Telstra already showed 3gbps on the Gold Coast, with the technology in its relative infancy, compared to the long-established 4G network.

        In terms of capacity, 5G can support approximately 1000 devices per metre more than 4G can.

        As you mention, 5G covers a shorter range than 4G. This is a limitation which can only be overcome by having a high density of signal generators (unless there’s a breakthrough or we break the laws of physics!). This will mean there’s a slow roll out, at first, but we will get widespread coverage, eventually, due to the opportunities that 5G opens up.

        The higher speeds, higher network capacity, and lower latency will all mean that tasks not currently possible on 4G, like accurate data transmission to self-driving vehicles, will be possible. Infrastructure and devices that aren’t able to utilise our current mobile networks will be capable of doing so, under 5G. All countries will be pushing widespread 5G coverage such that most homes will receive coverage by default.

        And this is all before considering future advancements.

        • +1 vote

          4G speeds are shit and that might be due to restrictions for bandwidth provided by telcos and availability in the spectrum.
          How can it be guaranteed with 5G? What 5G can achieve is different compared to what we will get.
          Even if it can handle more devices, does it mean it will be faster? There are way too much variables with no answers.

          Talking of Fibre, technically it can do Tbps speeds. Do we get it? No..


            @Gaggy: Well, you can base it off scalable assumptions.

            4G has achieved a maximum of approximately 1gbps, with high end real world speeds in the 300-400mbps range in very special circumstances (dependent on device, tower location, congestion etc). More typically, the “realistic high end” is around 100-150mbps with a “realistic low end” around 20-40mbps.

            Given that 5G has achieved 1tbps which is 1000 times faster than 4G’s max speed, then you can go from there. Even if we halve this benefit when translating to real world values, such that it’s only a 500x improvement, then we’d still see realistic ranges of 10-20Gbps on the low end, and 50-75Gbps on the high end.

            Now, this is dependent on such bandwidth being opened up for each individual device. Given that there aren’t many use cases where such a high speed is required, even if they deliver 500mbps-1gbps for the average consumer whilst reserving higher bandwidth for other tasks and keeping speeds on the low end to maintain stability, then it would still be a massive improvement.

            • +5 votes

              @Strahany: the downside of the higher frequencies is lower propagation - hence the increased cell density.

              increased cell density (and the need to provide transmission network to the cells) means it is never going to be cost effective to roll out high bandwidth, high density 5G everywhere.

              I suggest if you dont have good LTE coverage now, you wont see an improvement at your location via 5G for a decade.

              (hmm - not sure why it did a direct reply to you)

        • +3 votes

          What a bunch of marketing wank!
          The high speeds of 5G will require line of sight to the tower, meaning that in the real world dropping down to the slower, lower frequency bands will be extremely common.

          The idea of needing a 5G network connection (or any network connection) for self driving cars is insane!

          Not only can self driving cars be packed with easily enough processing power to self driver without requiring some distant computer, but the concept of having a car that will either stop working/crash because it lost network connectivity (which it will not have outside of large built up areas if it relies on mm wave 5G), can be tied to some kind of subscription service that you have to pay for (and can be shut down after a few years) and is possible to hack (which is extremely possible with how criminally stupid car makers take system security) to do a huge amount of horrible things makes the whole concept nothing short of dystopian!

          • +2 votes

            @Namesareapain: I think you need to do your research before you mouth off.

            You are confusing the mmWave spectrum used in the USA that has close to only line of sight. This is not what is being initially used in Australia. Coverage will be similar to 2100MHz.

          • +4 votes

            @Namesareapain: You would need direct line of sight for 1tbps on 5G, just like you need direct line of sight for 1gbps on 4G. See my reply above as to how that scales and what can be expected; far from “marketing wank”.

            You’ve clearly demonstrated a lack of understanding as to what 5G would allow when it comes to driverless cars. The connection isn’t to offload computing to an off-site server, or to some form of subscription service.

            It’s to allow high throughput of data from multiple sources; some “typical online” sources like traffic and weather conditions, but the large majority will be communicating with traffic lights and the cars around them. Once more widespread, there will even be the possibility to have sensors at pedestrian crossings able to detect when someone is on the road, and relay that to the cars within the vicinity in an instant.

            It’s a common misconception to assume that 5G/4G/[insert other internet tech here] is used solely for communication to the WWW when, in reality, the major improvements will mostly come from the ability to communicate locally with latencies and throughputs only previously possible with wired connections.
            This isn’t possible due to bandwidth and latency limitations in 4G, but these restrictions are overcome with 5G.

      • +3 votes

        Yea, Liberals have been brainwashing everyone for wireless tech and getting eyes off in implementation of Fibre network with copper.

      • +1 vote


        From the research I've come to know, it's actually worse than that.

        The penetration of buildings and range of 5G is actually LESS then 4G signal. To get anywhere near what they are promising, they'd need a bucketload more towers closer to the users.

  • +15 votes

    Rip to latency…

  • +4 votes

    sweet I hope this pushes to cheaper NBN deals + maybe even faster speeds, plus many misinformed people saying this will kill NBN which obviously it wont