Comments on: Monopolizing bandwidth http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2014/02/17/monopolizing-bandwidth/ A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: 5 x USB power bank charger http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2014/02/17/monopolizing-bandwidth/comment-page-1/#comment-55981 Fri, 24 Oct 2014 09:41:09 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=23125#comment-55981 Looking forward to reading more!

]]>
By: Myriam Schiveley http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2014/02/17/monopolizing-bandwidth/comment-page-1/#comment-55318 Fri, 17 Oct 2014 17:10:25 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=23125#comment-55318 Rattling superb info can be found on weblog . “I know of no great men except those who have rendered great service to the human race.” by Francois Marie Arouet Voltaire.

]]>
By: fifa 15 ultimate team coins http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2014/02/17/monopolizing-bandwidth/comment-page-1/#comment-52591 Thu, 25 Sep 2014 21:46:00 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=23125#comment-52591 I’m very happy to read this. This is the kind of manual that needs to be given and not the random misinformation that is at the other blogs. Appreciate your sharing this greatest doc.

]]>
By: Zdneal http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2014/02/17/monopolizing-bandwidth/comment-page-1/#comment-49279 Fri, 21 Feb 2014 15:23:10 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=23125#comment-49279 KenG_CA

Ah, but they wouldn’t be providing broadband. They would be providing wires/fibers/cables (OSI Layer 1). The stuff that goes on the wires (OSI Layer 2+) would be provided by some sufficiently corrupt capitalist entity.

]]>
By: mikee_eekim http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2014/02/17/monopolizing-bandwidth/comment-page-1/#comment-49277 Fri, 21 Feb 2014 10:23:22 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=23125#comment-49277 Also, New Zealand is thousands of kilometres away from, well, everywhere, so the physical reality of adding more bandwidth (i.e. laying additional submarine fibre) is non-trivial, and expensive.

]]>
By: y2kurtus http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2014/02/17/monopolizing-bandwidth/comment-page-1/#comment-49259 Wed, 19 Feb 2014 04:03:52 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=23125#comment-49259 Even this dyed in the wool capitalist considers the TWX/CMCSA merger to be totally unacceptable on anti-trust grounds. My god the real cell phone companies are required to offer their own networks to competitors on competitive terms. I think there are 7 possible cell providers (sharing 4 real networks) where I live… I have 1 cable option and DSL is hardly broadband at all.

No freaking way this merger gets approved. And rather than just piss and moan about it on blog comments file a public comment with the DOJ when the case opens. Here is a link to their guidelines for horizontal mergers… this proposed transaction seems to violate at lest half of them…

http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/guidel ines/hmg-2010.html

]]>
By: jsgreenfield http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2014/02/17/monopolizing-bandwidth/comment-page-1/#comment-49258 Wed, 19 Feb 2014 02:51:58 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=23125#comment-49258 There is so much wrong here that it’s hard to know where to begin.

On the one hand, we are approaching a national broadband crisis. On the other hand, we have an abundance of supply of broadband capacity. How can both be true?

Monopolies have constrained capacity because they have no incentive to invest. The US has plenty of capacity, but that’s still a product of monopoly? Again, aren’t these contradictory?

There are certainly some serious logic problems here, but then they’re also built on factually incorrect suppositions.

The chart is attributed to OECD (the same graphic is cited in articles all over the web, claiming the same OECD attribution), but is not locatable anywhere on OECD site, has no links to an underlying OECD report and methodology, and no indication of what timeframe it is supposed to reflect.

What we can say from the nice round speed numbers on the charts, as well as OECD’s stated methodology for other broadband reporting, is that OECD reports based on marketing offers, from a small sample of providers. They report speeds based on advertised speeds, without regard to what is actually delivered. They may also be reporting pricing before it is loaded with mandatory fees and taxes.

So presumably the reported data above reflects the best speeds and pricing found advertised, regardless of how widely or narrowly it is available in the given country, regardless of whether the speeds are actually delivered, and potentially without regard to whether the prices exclude “hidden fees.”

But, do any of the many people who have posted rants based on the above chart actually know how the chart was constructed, and by whom? Is anybody able to provide an actual citation to the source and methodology?

Then also, an underlying assumption: “Internet service is very cheap to provide.” This claim is based on what? Certainly not fact, and certainly not insight based on knowledge of the broadband business, because it’s dead wrong.

Internet service is very expensive to provide, not in terms of operating expense which critics myopically focus on because it suits their argument, but in terms of capital expense for unending capacity enhancement, and nowhere more than in the US, where per-user utilizations are much higher than the rest of the world, nearly 3x that of Europe, and have been growing at 40+% CAGR for many years, with no end in sight.

Anybody who is interested in understanding how the US really compares to other countries, including transparently sourced real-world data, and fully explained analysis, can find the actual facts here:

http://cimc-greenfield.com/2014/02/18/ar e-isps-gouging-us-broadband-users/

]]>
By: BuzzyR http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2014/02/17/monopolizing-bandwidth/comment-page-1/#comment-49256 Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:18:54 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=23125#comment-49256 To be contrarian here on the sentence “they will have essentially no incentive to improve their own broadband infrastructure” cable TV companies have invested something like $200 billion to upgrade from their old, 1-way analog networks to digital hybrid fiber-coaxial networks capable of delivering broadband (note they did this without any government subsidies). What was their incentive other than to innovate, satisfy customer demand and build their businesses? To the extent that the video industry only becomes more competitive going forward (Netflix now has over 33 million subscribers in the U.S. alone) wouldn’t they be expected to continue innovating in order to remain competitive?

I’m not really sure on what basis Krugman makes his statement?

]]>
By: BuzzyR http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2014/02/17/monopolizing-bandwidth/comment-page-1/#comment-49255 Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:16:38 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=23125#comment-49255 To be contrarian here on the sentence “they will have essentially no incentive to improve their own broadband infrastructure” cable TV companies have invested something like $200 billion to upgrade from their old, 1-way analog networks to digital hybrid fiber-coaxial networks capable of delivering broadband (note they did this without any government subsidies). What was their incentive other than to innovate, satisfy customer demand and build their businesses? To the extent that the video industry only becomes more competitive going forward (Netflix now has over 33 million subscribers in the U.S. alone) wouldn’t they be expected to continue innovating in order to remain competitive?

I’m not really sure on what basis Krugman makes his statement?

]]>
By: jsgreenfield http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2014/02/17/monopolizing-bandwidth/comment-page-1/#comment-49254 Tue, 18 Feb 2014 18:38:05 +0000 https://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=23125#comment-49254 The problem with this argument is that the facts contradict the claims of vast foreign superiority in broadband.

For a serious analysis of the real-world data on comparative broadband performance and cost, see:

http://cimc-greenfield.com/2014/02/18/ar e-isps-gouging-us-broadband-users/

]]>