Comments on: Healthy Broadband Competition http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/ Keeping politicians' hands off the Net & everything else related to technology Fri, 25 May 2012 18:27:01 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Tim http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/comment-page-1/#comment-50629 Tim Sat, 15 Jul 2006 19:56:39 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/#comment-50629 <p>Michael,<br><br>For Minnesota customers (where I grew up) Qwest's web site is currently advertising 1.5 Mbit for $21.99, or 5 Mbit for $26.99. So I don't think it's true that DSL users are stuck at 800 kbps. Consumers appear to have a wide range of options between high cost/low speed and high speed/low cost.<br><br>You say you want 30 Mbits for DSL prices? Well, the fastest way to get that is to encourage the Baby Bells to roll out fiber, so that in 2-5 years the "premium" packages get you 100 Mbit and the bargain rates get you 30 Mbit.<br><br>Would it be better if there were more competition? Certainly. But I don't see what that has to do with the network neutrality debate. Tying up broadband providers in red tape isn't going to make it more likely that new competitors will start offering broadband services.</p> Michael,

For Minnesota customers (where I grew up) Qwest’s web site is currently advertising 1.5 Mbit for $21.99, or 5 Mbit for $26.99. So I don’t think it’s true that DSL users are stuck at 800 kbps. Consumers appear to have a wide range of options between high cost/low speed and high speed/low cost.

You say you want 30 Mbits for DSL prices? Well, the fastest way to get that is to encourage the Baby Bells to roll out fiber, so that in 2-5 years the “premium” packages get you 100 Mbit and the bargain rates get you 30 Mbit.

Would it be better if there were more competition? Certainly. But I don’t see what that has to do with the network neutrality debate. Tying up broadband providers in red tape isn’t going to make it more likely that new competitors will start offering broadband services.

]]> By: Tim http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/comment-page-1/#comment-34083 Tim Sat, 15 Jul 2006 18:56:39 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/#comment-34083 <p>Michael,</p> <p>For Minnesota customers (where I grew up) Qwest's web site is currently advertising 1.5 Mbit for $21.99, or 5 Mbit for $26.99. So I don't think it's true that DSL users are stuck at 800 kbps. Consumers appear to have a wide range of options between high cost/low speed and high speed/low cost.</p> <p>You say you want 30 Mbits for DSL prices? Well, the fastest way to get that is to encourage the Baby Bells to roll out fiber, so that in 2-5 years the "premium" packages get you 100 Mbit and the bargain rates get you 30 Mbit.</p> <p>Would it be better if there were more competition? Certainly. But I don't see what that has to do with the network neutrality debate. Tying up broadband providers in red tape isn't going to make it more likely that new competitors will start offering broadband services.</p> Michael,

For Minnesota customers (where I grew up) Qwest’s web site is currently advertising 1.5 Mbit for $21.99, or 5 Mbit for $26.99. So I don’t think it’s true that DSL users are stuck at 800 kbps. Consumers appear to have a wide range of options between high cost/low speed and high speed/low cost.

You say you want 30 Mbits for DSL prices? Well, the fastest way to get that is to encourage the Baby Bells to roll out fiber, so that in 2-5 years the “premium” packages get you 100 Mbit and the bargain rates get you 30 Mbit.

Would it be better if there were more competition? Certainly. But I don’t see what that has to do with the network neutrality debate. Tying up broadband providers in red tape isn’t going to make it more likely that new competitors will start offering broadband services.

]]> By: Michael Larmoyeux http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/comment-page-1/#comment-50628 Michael Larmoyeux Sat, 15 Jul 2006 04:04:12 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/#comment-50628 <p>If DSL is cheaper than Cable, but only about 800 kbps, is that really broadband?<br>If Cable keeps their prices the same, and just adds more bandwidth at a higher price, is that competition helping to spread broadband?<br><br>So, first, make broadband really BROADBAND. Make it cheap. Make sure it's everywhere. I want 30 Mbps for the cost of DSL.<br><br>Now, which will get us that (30 Mbps cheap) faster? Having a handful of giant Cable and Telco companies, with only a choice between one or the other of them in most areas of the country? Or having multiple Cable and multiple Telco companies serving each and every household? Which model represents real competition? And which one will get us cheaper bandwidth faster?</p> If DSL is cheaper than Cable, but only about 800 kbps, is that really broadband?
If Cable keeps their prices the same, and just adds more bandwidth at a higher price, is that competition helping to spread broadband?

So, first, make broadband really BROADBAND. Make it cheap. Make sure it’s everywhere. I want 30 Mbps for the cost of DSL.

Now, which will get us that (30 Mbps cheap) faster? Having a handful of giant Cable and Telco companies, with only a choice between one or the other of them in most areas of the country? Or having multiple Cable and multiple Telco companies serving each and every household? Which model represents real competition? And which one will get us cheaper bandwidth faster?

]]> By: Michael Larmoyeux http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/comment-page-1/#comment-34082 Michael Larmoyeux Sat, 15 Jul 2006 03:04:12 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/#comment-34082 <p>If DSL is cheaper than Cable, but only about 800 kbps, is that really broadband? If Cable keeps their prices the same, and just adds more bandwidth at a higher price, is that competition helping to spread broadband?</p> <p>So, first, make broadband really BROADBAND. Make it cheap. Make sure it's everywhere. I want 30 Mbps for the cost of DSL.</p> <p>Now, which will get us that (30 Mbps cheap) faster? Having a handful of giant Cable and Telco companies, with only a choice between one or the other of them in most areas of the country? Or having multiple Cable and multiple Telco companies serving each and every household? Which model represents real competition? And which one will get us cheaper bandwidth faster?</p> If DSL is cheaper than Cable, but only about 800 kbps, is that really broadband? If Cable keeps their prices the same, and just adds more bandwidth at a higher price, is that competition helping to spread broadband?

So, first, make broadband really BROADBAND. Make it cheap. Make sure it’s everywhere. I want 30 Mbps for the cost of DSL.

Now, which will get us that (30 Mbps cheap) faster? Having a handful of giant Cable and Telco companies, with only a choice between one or the other of them in most areas of the country? Or having multiple Cable and multiple Telco companies serving each and every household? Which model represents real competition? And which one will get us cheaper bandwidth faster?

]]> By: Jim Harper http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/comment-page-1/#comment-50627 Jim Harper Thu, 13 Jul 2006 18:12:15 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/#comment-50627 <p>Constance, it appears you came into the middle of the conversation. The discussion has been centered on price. My point was to wonder why price is such a fixation when quality (in this case, throughput) is another apparent strong interest of consumers.<br><br>More broadly, competition is a means to an end, not an end in itself. The study I suggest goes to the goal of competition - getting broadband service to consumers at the lowest possible price. Counting noses (providers) doesn't tell you if that's happening. You could have six, sixty, or six hundred DSL providers and if they're all making enormous profit from providing the service, then price competition is not happening. So, again, the focus should be on the relationship between the cost of providing the service and the price charged.</p> Constance, it appears you came into the middle of the conversation. The discussion has been centered on price. My point was to wonder why price is such a fixation when quality (in this case, throughput) is another apparent strong interest of consumers.

More broadly, competition is a means to an end, not an end in itself. The study I suggest goes to the goal of competition – getting broadband service to consumers at the lowest possible price. Counting noses (providers) doesn’t tell you if that’s happening. You could have six, sixty, or six hundred DSL providers and if they’re all making enormous profit from providing the service, then price competition is not happening. So, again, the focus should be on the relationship between the cost of providing the service and the price charged.

]]> By: Tim Lee http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/comment-page-1/#comment-50626 Tim Lee Thu, 13 Jul 2006 17:22:42 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/#comment-50626 <p>I don't know what the situation is where you live, but in St. Louis, at least, the broadband providers are waiving installation fees and even offering special introductory rates for switchers. Obviously, more options is always better, but there certainly seems to be a fair amount of competition going on.</p> I don’t know what the situation is where you live, but in St. Louis, at least, the broadband providers are waiving installation fees and even offering special introductory rates for switchers. Obviously, more options is always better, but there certainly seems to be a fair amount of competition going on.

]]> By: Jim Harper http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/comment-page-1/#comment-34081 Jim Harper Thu, 13 Jul 2006 17:12:15 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/#comment-34081 <p>Constance, it appears you came into the middle of the conversation. The discussion has been centered on price. My point was to wonder why price is such a fixation when quality (in this case, throughput) is another apparent strong interest of consumers.</p> <p>More broadly, competition is a means to an end, not an end in itself. The study I suggest goes to the goal of competition - getting broadband service to consumers at the lowest possible price. Counting noses (providers) doesn't tell you if that's happening. You could have six, sixty, or six hundred DSL providers and if they're all making enormous profit from providing the service, then price competition is not happening. So, again, the focus should be on the relationship between the cost of providing the service and the price charged.</p> Constance, it appears you came into the middle of the conversation. The discussion has been centered on price. My point was to wonder why price is such a fixation when quality (in this case, throughput) is another apparent strong interest of consumers.

More broadly, competition is a means to an end, not an end in itself. The study I suggest goes to the goal of competition – getting broadband service to consumers at the lowest possible price. Counting noses (providers) doesn’t tell you if that’s happening. You could have six, sixty, or six hundred DSL providers and if they’re all making enormous profit from providing the service, then price competition is not happening. So, again, the focus should be on the relationship between the cost of providing the service and the price charged.

]]> By: Constance Reader http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/comment-page-1/#comment-50625 Constance Reader Thu, 13 Jul 2006 16:36:38 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/#comment-50625 <p>The lack of competition argument does not refer to price, it refers to number of service providers avaiable in a given area, and thus consumer choice. Very few consumers in the U.S. have a choice of more than one broadband provider, and even fewer have a choice that would not require large upfront fees and equipment change. In other words, those that have a choice must choose between two different technologies, cable and DSL. But they do not have a choice between multiple DSL providers or multiple cable modem providers.</p> The lack of competition argument does not refer to price, it refers to number of service providers avaiable in a given area, and thus consumer choice. Very few consumers in the U.S. have a choice of more than one broadband provider, and even fewer have a choice that would not require large upfront fees and equipment change. In other words, those that have a choice must choose between two different technologies, cable and DSL. But they do not have a choice between multiple DSL providers or multiple cable modem providers.

]]> By: Tim Lee http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/comment-page-1/#comment-34080 Tim Lee Thu, 13 Jul 2006 16:22:42 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/#comment-34080 <p>I don't know what the situation is where you live, but in St. Louis, at least, the broadband providers are waiving installation fees and even offering special introductory rates for switchers. Obviously, more options is always better, but there certainly seems to be a fair amount of competition going on.</p> I don’t know what the situation is where you live, but in St. Louis, at least, the broadband providers are waiving installation fees and even offering special introductory rates for switchers. Obviously, more options is always better, but there certainly seems to be a fair amount of competition going on.

]]> By: Constance Reader http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/comment-page-1/#comment-34079 Constance Reader Thu, 13 Jul 2006 15:36:38 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/#comment-34079 <p>The lack of competition argument does not refer to price, it refers to number of service providers avaiable in a given area, and thus consumer choice. Very few consumers in the U.S. have a choice of more than one broadband provider, and even fewer have a choice that would not require large upfront fees and equipment change. In other words, those that have a choice must choose between two different technologies, cable and DSL. But they do not have a choice between multiple DSL providers or multiple cable modem providers.</p> The lack of competition argument does not refer to price, it refers to number of service providers avaiable in a given area, and thus consumer choice. Very few consumers in the U.S. have a choice of more than one broadband provider, and even fewer have a choice that would not require large upfront fees and equipment change. In other words, those that have a choice must choose between two different technologies, cable and DSL. But they do not have a choice between multiple DSL providers or multiple cable modem providers.

]]> By: Jim Harper http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/comment-page-1/#comment-50624 Jim Harper Wed, 12 Jul 2006 17:11:59 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/#comment-50624 <p>I've been discussing this a bit with Mike over on <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060711/122200.shtml" rel="nofollow">TechDirt</a>. I'm not sure why everyone is so fixed on price when the study seems to reflect the interest of many consumers in throughput. My major comment is <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/article.php?sid=20060711/122200#c785" rel="nofollow">here</a>. The heart of it is:</p> <blockquote>I'm not sure why *price* competition is so important. The study appears to reflect that some consumers want more bandwidth, a niche being pursued by cable. Other consumers want savings, and DSL is more for them. (You could just as easily complain about lacking "throughput competition" because DSL isn't increasing its throughput as fast as cable.) <p>The study that would really be insightful is one that showed whether broadband service was priced at (or barely above) the cost of providing it. Measuring profit per unit of bandwidth sold would be the best measure of how effective price competition is, as opposed to deductive metrics like counting the number of competitors. </p></blockquote> I’ve been discussing this a bit with Mike over on TechDirt. I’m not sure why everyone is so fixed on price when the study seems to reflect the interest of many consumers in throughput. My major comment is here. The heart of it is:

I’m not sure why *price* competition is so important. The study appears to reflect that some consumers want more bandwidth, a niche being pursued by cable. Other consumers want savings, and DSL is more for them. (You could just as easily complain about lacking “throughput competition” because DSL isn’t increasing its throughput as fast as cable.)

The study that would really be insightful is one that showed whether broadband service was priced at (or barely above) the cost of providing it. Measuring profit per unit of bandwidth sold would be the best measure of how effective price competition is, as opposed to deductive metrics like counting the number of competitors.

]]> By: Jim Harper http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/comment-page-1/#comment-34078 Jim Harper Wed, 12 Jul 2006 16:11:59 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/07/12/healthy-broadband-competition/#comment-34078 <p>I've been discussing this a bit with Mike over on <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060711/122200.shtml" rel="nofollow">TechDirt</a>. I'm not sure why everyone is so fixed on price when the study seems to reflect the interest of many consumers in throughput. My major comment is <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/article.php?sid=20060711/122200#c785" rel="nofollow">here</a>. The heart of it is:</p> <blockquote>I'm not sure why *price* competition is so important. The study appears to reflect that some consumers want more bandwidth, a niche being pursued by cable. Other consumers want savings, and DSL is more for them. (You could just as easily complain about lacking "throughput competition" because DSL isn't increasing its throughput as fast as cable.) <p>The study that would really be insightful is one that showed whether broadband service was priced at (or barely above) the cost of providing it. Measuring profit per unit of bandwidth sold would be the best measure of how effective price competition is, as opposed to deductive metrics like counting the number of competitors. </p></blockquote> I’ve been discussing this a bit with Mike over on TechDirt. I’m not sure why everyone is so fixed on price when the study seems to reflect the interest of many consumers in throughput. My major comment is here. The heart of it is:

I’m not sure why *price* competition is so important. The study appears to reflect that some consumers want more bandwidth, a niche being pursued by cable. Other consumers want savings, and DSL is more for them. (You could just as easily complain about lacking “throughput competition” because DSL isn’t increasing its throughput as fast as cable.)

The study that would really be insightful is one that showed whether broadband service was priced at (or barely above) the cost of providing it. Measuring profit per unit of bandwidth sold would be the best measure of how effective price competition is, as opposed to deductive metrics like counting the number of competitors.

]]>