Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?

Gian Constantine constantinegi at
Wed Jan 10 13:37:16 UTC 2007

I think it depends more on one's position within the industry and the  
depth of their pockets.

Every business model will depend on the type of content one can offer  
to subscribers. While their is a market for niche content, which is  
relatively easy and cheap to acquire, the returns are small. Smaller  
market will translate to smaller returns. For a small company this  
may be fine. But, this model will unlikely revolutionize the video  
distribution industry. Content with broad appeal is extremely  
difficult and expensive to acquire. Ultimately, this dictates the  
business model.

It is going to take a substantial amount of time to refocus the  
entrenched culture of content providers on new delivery methods.  
Often the terms content providers present are too cumbersome and  
restrictive to allow a profitable business case.

Gian Anthony Constantine
Senior Network Design Engineer
Earthlink, Inc.
Office: 404-748-6207
Cell: 404-808-4651
Internal Ext: x22007
constantinegi at

On Jan 10, 2007, at 1:52 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:

> On Jan 9, 2007, at 8:40 PM, Gian Constantine wrote:
>> It would not be any easier. The negotiations are very complex. The  
>> issue is not one of infrastructure capex. It is one of jockeying  
>> between content providers (big media conglomerates) and the video  
>> service providers (cable companies).
> Not necessarily. Depends on your business model.
> Regards
> Marshall
>> Gian Anthony Constantine
>> Senior Network Design Engineer
>> Earthlink, Inc.
>> On Jan 9, 2007, at 7:57 PM, Bora Akyol wrote:
>>> Simon
>>> An additional point to consider is that it takes a lot of effort and
>>> $$$$ to get a channel allocated to your content in a cable network.
>>> This is much easier when TV is being distributed over the Internet.
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: owner-nanog at [mailto:owner-nanog at] On
>>>> Behalf Of Simon Lockhart
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 2:42 PM
>>>> To: Michael.Dillon at
>>>> Cc: nanog at
>>>> Subject: Re: Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a
>>>> day, continuously?
>>>> On Tue Jan 09, 2007 at 07:52:02AM +0000,
>>>> Michael.Dillon at wrote:
>>>>> Given that the broadcast model for streaming content
>>>>> is so successful, why would you want to use the
>>>>> Internet for it? What is the benefit?
>>>> How many channels can you get on your (terrestrial) broadcast
>>>> receiver?
>>>> If you want more, your choices are satellite or cable. To get
>>>> cable, you
>>>> need to be in a cable area. To get satellite, you need to
>>>> stick a dish on
>>>> the side of your house, which you may not want to do, or may
>>>> not be allowed
>>>> to do.
>>>> With IPTV, you just need a phoneline (and be close enough to
>>>> the exchange/CO
>>>> to get decent xDSL rate). In the UK, I'm already delivering
>>>> 40+ channels over
>>>> IPTV (over inter-provider multicast, to any UK ISP that wants it).
>>>> Simon

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the NANOG mailing list