There's no reason to take exception to my terminology. It wasn't meant as a criticism of your business. There is no shame in not being a multi-billion dollar behemoth. There is no judgemental baggage intended with my use of the term outlier. Nor is it intended to suggest that we should be indifferent to your concerns. It is simply stated as a statistical reality.
The fact remains that a small handful of non-wisp wireline providers(the big cablecos and ilecs) controls the vast majority of the broadband market. The fact that these incumbents are a numerically small number of companies compared to a larger number of small providers doesn't change their overwhelming dominance of the market and it only proves the concentration of power in this industry and why boundaries have to be set for the small number of companies that holds this power.
Your situation does not represent their situation and your situation shouldn't be the guide to policy. Net neutrality is designed to limit their ability to leverage their power into control of content and subversion of competition. It isn't intended to sabotage small companies. If policy has a detrimental effect on small companies they could be exempted from such rules. There is no reason to burden small companies with these rules because small companies don't have market dominance.
It should be. Because if competitors like us are not protected and stimulated -- and especially if we are heavily regulated -- we will not be here tomorrow. And then you'll truly be stuck with a duopoly consisting of huge corporations.
