2 ms·
You're missing the point, but not for the reason given below. The pipe is the natural monopoly, not the services provided over it. This is so obvious that it ha
by necubi 17y ago
You're missing the point, but not for the reason given below. The pipe is the natural monopoly, not the services provided over it. This is so obvious that it hardly bears repeating, but again: it makes no more economic sense for multiple companies to run fiber to each house than it does for multiple companies to run electric wires to each house.
Sure you can use Vonage for phone instead of AT&T (or whatever), but you can only do that because you have a pipe to the internet. VoIP services are means of getting phone over a different pipe, but you still need a pipe.
You also seem to miss the point of my comment: governments should have policies like mandatory local-loop unbundling (also called line-sharing) which produce competition where it makes sense (providing backbone) instead of where it makes little sense (providing the "last-mile" connection).
Finally, a duopoly is better than a monopoly, but not by much. It still gives the players far too much control of the market.