Anyway, that's my question. There's already a perfectly good, perfectly simple way for ISPs to recover the cost of providing lots of bandwidth: just charge the customers who use it. Existing peering and transit arrangements wouldn't be affected, and there would be no net neutrality implications. So why not do it? What am I missing?My cynical answer is that there are a lot of markets that are large but for which service is sub-optimal (think New York City) If you charge users by bandwidth, the people in these markets would likely end up getting a discount because they are light user simply because it is nearly impossible to be heavy users. But everyone would like some internet access.
So this is a way to have your cake and eat it as well. In markets with bad service you make money as a gatekeeper. In places with good service, you recover cash from the content providers who use the capacity.
If you are wondering if this sounds a lot like a monopoly or a lack of competitive markets, you are probably correct. After all, cell phones (which appear to still have a competitive market) had absolutely no trouble rolling out bandwidth based pricing. Customers grumbled, but everyone gave up and adapted to it.
No comments:
Post a Comment