 sbrookPremium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:4
 ·TekSavvy Cable
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| reply to Corvus
Re: Someone has to pay I think what's going on here is that the broadband operators are starting to realize that they are starting to approach maximum penetration, so there will be fewer and fewer new light users to help offset the bandwidth costs of the heavier users.
They are probably coming to the conclusion that the cost of bulk bandwidth is not going to drop significantly to match the increase in traffic.
So, they're trying to find a way to make up the shortfall by making somebody pay, and not their customers.
In some ways this is a new incarnation of the portal, which didn't work very well. After all, that's how AOL and Compuserve started out ... portals to information that they controlled themselves ... then portals to the internet.
Then we had the MSNs and Yahoo!s of the world co-brand with various ISPs to provide portalling and therefore reduce the costs to the ISP. Well, that's not working too well. Rumours abound, but it appears that it hasn't been the good deal for the ISPs that they were hoping (surprise, surprise) and some may not renew their portalling agreements.
So, the goal is to find some other poor sucker pay for the bandwidth, because the customer won't directly on his monthly fees.
Look at Rogers ... they are just waiting in the wings with a per GB excess bandwidth charge.
While at the moment, it really would be double dipping (after all we are currently paying for the bandwidth we consume), but the day when bandwidth costs won't be covered by income is rapidly approaching.
Basically, it comes down to the problem that ISPs have had since the early 90s ... content is constantly outstripping the cost of the available bandwidth. This is why I think the use of internet for phone, and essentially broadcast video is an expensive waste. |
