3 ms·
It sounds like what we need is the equivalent of local loop unbundling for internet services: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local-loop_unbundling http://en.wikip
by sologoub 13y ago
It sounds like what we need is the equivalent of local loop unbundling for internet services: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local-loop_unbundling http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local-loop_unbundling
In the UK, I believe the main practice revolves around broadband, whereas in US it's all around phone (VoIP or otherwise). If you could enable competition within the same last mile service, you'd a)give a definite incentive to make sure the entire network delivers the best experience and b)have alternate sources of revenue to maintain the last mile network.
The current duopoly that exists SoCal in most areas (1 cable provider and 1 DSL provider) is a really terrible consumer experience. For those who have access to FiOS, it's a tad better, but not by much.
If you had access to 10 providers at once with comparable services, there would be real incentive for them to offer the best possible experience and lowest possible prices to consumers... but of course that would hurt corporate profits and so on and no politician getting those donations wants that...
- AnthonyMouse 13y agoWhat we really need is the equivalent of Glass-Steagall for internet services. Prohibit the company that operates the last mile from owning or being owned by anybody that offers end-to-end connectivity or over the top services to end users. The problem with just local loop unbundling is that the last mile provider has the incentive to favor their own services. They can operate their own ISP division at a loss or with zero margins (more than made up for by profits in the last mile division) which disadvantages competitors who have to lease the last mile and thereby maintains the status quo of no competition.