3 ms·
Why would an ISP bother building out the infrastructure if they can't extract a higher value from those that it most benefits (Netflix)? It's not only
by zaphar 12y ago
Why would an ISP bother building out the infrastructure if
they can't extract a higher value from those that it most
benefits (Netflix)?
It's not only Netflix that benefits. It's also the consumer. Our family for instance watches almost all of their Video via Netflix, Amazon, and Youtube. We don't pay for a cable package. Saying it most benefits Netflix does a disservice to my family. I don't want Cable TV. I want Netflix. Comcast wants to deny me Netflix unless Netflix agrees to pay them more money.
Looking at it from my perspective. I'm paying Comcast for the ability to stream Netflix. They advertise to me as having the fastest speeds for streaming video. And yet when I request Netflix they refuse to do what's necessary to allow me to stream Netflix.
Consumers that don't use broadband extensive services: Why
should those consumers be subsidizing those that use
broadband heavy services?
Why Indeed? If Comcast want's to offer less broadband intensive plans they have every right to. If they want to charge me higher prices for a more broadband intensive plan then more power to them. The issue is that they degrade my service so they can extract a price from Netflix when I purchased the right to stream from Netflix from them.
I think a better solution to very little competition in
ISPs would be to decrease the barriers it takes to
compete. Further regulation would only increase the
barriers.
It's almost impossible to decrease those barriers without regulation. Running wires to every home is expensive and the first one there almost always wins. The reasons why broadband is a natural monopoly have been discussed in depth on this site. Those reasons have not changed.
The real crux of the problem here is that large ISP's like comcast are selling one thing to their consumers: a certain amount of bandwidth to any site on the internet and then purposely failing to deliver that bandwidth to the customer and blaming it on someone else.
- bko 12y agoYes, running wires to homes is expensive. By making it less lucrative and tying the hands of those that build those wires, you're not exactly encouraging competition. I'd imagine if ISPs abused this rent-seeking, companies like Netflix and Google would actually become interested in building out their own infrastructure. However Netflix would be less inclined to do so if it were not able to favor their service over competitors. One decision is to treat ISPs like a public utility which is where I think the US is heading. In my experience, though, services brought to me by the government are often lack-luster. Google Fiber: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/10/arkansas-firms-look-at-fiber-as-nets-future/ http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/10/arkansas-fir...