2 ms·

That's a great description of the mobile market around 2011, with Verizon and AT&T splitting the lion's share. But since then they have hemorrhaged subscribers

That's a great description of the mobile market around 2011, with Verizon and AT&T splitting the lion's share. But since then they have hemorrhaged subscribers to T-Mobile, in part thanks to T-Mobile's zero-rated streaming services (which other carriers have now copied). These services make the EFF's skin crawl, but it turns out customers actually like them. So entrenched incumbent ISPs in fact can be rapidly unseated, and in a competitive market ISPs may violate NN by offering free services rather than raising prices. I don't know if it's possible, but this seems like a better outcome than giving up and declaring home internet to be a natural monopoly like utilities.

sundaeofshock 9y ago
>That's a great description of the mobile market around 2011, with Verizon and AT&T splitting the lion's share. But since then they have hemorrhaged subscribers to T-Mobile< Where are you getting you numbers? In Q1 2011, AT&T and Verizon controlled 65%, with T-Mobile at 11%. In Q1 2017, T-Mobile lept to 17.4% with AT&T/Verizon at 67.2%. I have to say, you have a very strange definition of “hemorrhage.” Your overt bias and half-truths in this thread have done a great job of reinforcing my support in NN. I also had not thought about treating home internet as a natural monopoly until now. Kudos to you! https://www.statista.com/statistics/199359/market-share-of-wireless-carriers-in-the-us-by-subscriptions/#0 https://www.statista.com/statistics/199359/market-share-of-w...