| reply to jjeffeory
Re: Great, More Ammo For The Cap Arguments The biggest problem I have is that the MSO's are constantly painted to be the bad guys. They carry the load that delivers all the traffic and the only thing they can do to improve their infrastructure and business is bill the customers. This ofcourse makes them the bad-guys and the 'content' people the poor guys getting the shaft.
You drive past a construction site and see the dumpster and think I have a couch that I need to get rid of. You ignore the sign that says "no public dumping" and you throw it in the dumpster and move on with your life. Someone else paid for that dumpster and now they have to pay more to empty it because of what you did. The ISP backbones are in the same category (and I don't mean in the trash 
I'll take the example of *some* of these Internet Video stb's in circulation. Several of them use p2p or a variation to distribute their content. These companies exist on a model that says they don't have to pay for bandwidth to deliver their service. Or atleast not nearly as much bandwidth as would be required if they sourced the content 100% themselves. So why can't these large content providers share their profits with the MSO's and help with investing in the infrastructure to provide better services.
Earlier threads reference the satellite VOD systems that use the internet for the content. Great the satellite company gets paid. But when the MSO needs to upgrade the Satellite company doesn't exactly come forward and say "Don't raise the rates.. here is a $10million to invest in your infrastructure".
So the MSO's are faced with three choices Much larger rate increases, traffic management, and nothing.
What's the right answer I have no idea.. I know the existing model is broken.. I think that billing the customers for usage isn't the answer. I think billing the content source is more appropriate than the "customer". Let these internet business truly factor in bandwidth costs in their business model. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Comcast
| As a customer I expect my rates to climb , and I f I am paying for hi speed net connections , then I am putting into their funds to increase the strength of the network.
Why should the satellite company ? I pay the Cable co anyway.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" |
|
| reply to NetKrazy
Do what??? You act like the MSO's aren't already billing the customers. They are already bringing in very "healthy" profits, why can't they use those profits to upgrade their infrastructure? Make the service better so that people are willing to pay a little more for it raise rates slightly for the more advanced services that have been added, rince and repeat!
Oh wait, that's because MSO's want people to pay them for NOTHING! They are already price gouging, and now they want even more money for not doing or adding ANYTHING?????
Seems to me that these companies want to change their business structure to be more like a casino, give us your money and hope you get something in return, if not for "F* yourself"...... |
|
