Talkiet: I can't believe I'm about to pull out the old roading analogy, but I will, since it seems it's needed.
I've taken all sorts of license with this, and parts are for amusement, and clarification...
Anyway, imagine that Broadband isn't Broadband, and packets aren't packets... They are widgets, and you get widgets delivered every day. Widgets come from the US.
Today, the widgets are loaded into a container in the US, sent on a ship to NZ, unloaded in Auckland, then transferred to a train which takes the widgets to the town you're in and then they are put into a 1994 ford transit and delivered to your house.
Under UFB, the widgets are loaded into a container in the US, sent on a ship to NZ, unloaded in Auckland, then automatically loaded onto a bullet train which tears up and down the country at 300kmh and has a cunning system to unload the widgets into waiting ferraris at each town. The Ferrar (driven by Schumacher now he's retired from F1) then tears up the road and delivers you the widget.
So, hopefully this makes it clear why you MAY NOT see a dramatic improvement for international deliveries with UFB.
Cheers - N
I've always liked the 'road' analogy for broadband, but rather than represeting the types of broadband with different modes of transport I prefer size of the road.
Fibre Backhaul needs to have large capacity so is like a 10 lane highway, but one where LOADs of people use it so it gets oncgested at peak times. copper is like a single lane dirt track, but since it is mostly only you using it it rarely gets congested.
UFB replaces your own (copper) dirt track with a 10 lane highway, but doesn't make any different to the congestion on the (international backhaul) motorway.
So now you can zoom all the way to the motorway, but any motorway congestion still slows you down.
In fact as more and more people get their roads upgraded, they will want ot use the motorway more and more and so congestion might actually increase.