3 ms·

I disagree. Local loop un-bundling does not solve the problem. You are still back to the same situation. A single pipe can only handle so many providers, thus l

I disagree. Local loop un-bundling does not solve the problem. You are still back to the same situation. A single pipe can only handle so many providers, thus limit local competition to 2 or 3 providers. So either all will collude, or the one with the deeper pockets will under-price the other ones until they go out of business. (sure you can add more "regulation", but this just throwing duct tape on a broken system) Local infrastructure will always be a winner takes all economic game. So its pointless to play it. (side-note: Elon Musk's Starlink might change the economic game) The only way for people to "vote with their wallets" on local communication infrastructure, is BEFORE the winner "settles in", not AFTER. A bid system, allows 100's of companies to compete to set the price for 2-3 years. Rather than 2-3 companies competing to set the price for perpetuity. It also creates an incentive to produce quality service, because they will be competing for another contract in 2 to 3 years (i.e. they have 2-3 years to demonstrate they are a competent provider).

xkemp 7y ago
> A single pipe can only handle so many providers A single pipe can handle only so many customers. I don't see how it limits the number of providers? There actually are countriess with such rules, and they seem to work well. The difficult part is the need to set some uniform price providers must pay for that "last mile" connection to their customer. I seem to remember something like $8/month in Germany. That's actually low enough, it would allow healthy competition even if you set wholesale price 50% higher than neccessary. The same mechanism is used for competition among power and natural gas companies.
- snisarenko 7y ago
  I guess you are right. You can really put as many "providers" on a pipe as you want. But are they really providers from a competition standpoint, or just the same pipe with a different logo? The problem is that they can't compete on price (in the downwards direction), and they can't compete on building new infra with latest technology. The minimum price is established by the price the owner of the pipes charges. Which is usually set by the gov't. So the can only compete on value added services (i.e. hey we are not going to sell your data hooray!) The core competition we want in local infrastructure is faster internet and cheaper prices. I think the dual bid system can accomplish that (i.e. separate bids on building/upgrading infra, and bids on maintenance/support) As for gas and electricity, I think a similar bid system would work as well.
thayne 7y ago
> side-note: Elon Musk's Starlink might change the economic game It could also make the situation worse, if everyone changes to starlink and Starlink becomes a national or global monopoly ISP.
- nitrogen 7y ago
  Other companies are working on similar services, and in places with neutral wired service, LEO service will be unappealing.

xkemp 7y ago

> A single pipe can only handle so many providers A single pipe can handle only so many customers. I don't see how it limits the number of providers? There actually are countriess with such rules, and they seem to work well. The difficult part is the need to set some uniform price providers must pay for that "last mile" connection to their customer. I seem to remember something like $8/month in Germany. That's actually low enough, it would allow healthy competition even if you set wholesale price 50% higher than neccessary. The same mechanism is used for competition among power and natural gas companies.

snisarenko 7y ago
I guess you are right. You can really put as many "providers" on a pipe as you want. But are they really providers from a competition standpoint, or just the same pipe with a different logo? The problem is that they can't compete on price (in the downwards direction), and they can't compete on building new infra with latest technology. The minimum price is established by the price the owner of the pipes charges. Which is usually set by the gov't. So the can only compete on value added services (i.e. hey we are not going to sell your data hooray!) The core competition we want in local infrastructure is faster internet and cheaper prices. I think the dual bid system can accomplish that (i.e. separate bids on building/upgrading infra, and bids on maintenance/support) As for gas and electricity, I think a similar bid system would work as well.

thayne 7y ago

> side-note: Elon Musk's Starlink might change the economic game It could also make the situation worse, if everyone changes to starlink and Starlink becomes a national or global monopoly ISP.

nitrogen 7y ago
Other companies are working on similar services, and in places with neutral wired service, LEO service will be unappealing.