Hi Benson, I don't think TLS develops the hardware/modem but got...

Hi Benson, I don't think TLS develops the hardware/modem but got it from modem supplier like netgear. Notice the netgear nighthawk 4gX is from netgear but is promoted by TLS.  Its a bit like iphones, where telcos sells the products as part of the plan/package. Most consumer would not have any idea how to assess the quality of a network.

I also think this line from the article is telling on the non-compete with NBN.

Telstra explains this clause by saying that it can't put flyers in letterboxes saying buy our wireless broadband instead of NBN Co's fixed broadband. But we're perfectly free to put flyers in letterboxes saying buy our wonderful wireless broadband that can do all these wonderful things.

And that further, it didn't see the clause -- insisted on by NBN Co -- as limiting in the slightest its ability to sell wireless. Except and absolutely crucially, that's wireless against wireless. Not against fixed.

I think in many ways, getting a government lease is "guaranteed" revenue? At the sacrifice you can't advertise it as a fixed broadband/NBN replacement. The 4G TLS gateway is advertised as a "backup". Noticed they have it in their adverts clause and that the speed is limited to like 1.5MB or something only. There is absolutely no problem for it to go "full" speed. I believe this is also there for TLS to say, "hey, its a backup, the speed is still sheet compared to the NBN, so we are fine in the non-compete clause."  If TLS provides a 5G modem, its likely they would adopt the same policy on it, as a backup. In case the government brings out the none-compete clause. 

Like RB said, verizon fixed wireless in the US would be interesting to watch. I think on mmwave, even getting a technician to install an antenna/receiver at the window is a lot easier then digging trenches/laying cables.