Some truth about Comcast - WikiLeaks style

Thu Dec 16 17:50:00 UTC 2010

If Comcast is charging providers to carry bits, how long until Verizon does
the same? it becomes an "everyone else is getting paid" situation.

I think it is better for the the content providers to be financially
responsible for efficiency of transmission, which only happens when they
(not the consumer) pays per byte.

The consumer is already paying on a sliding scale to (Netflix). You want 1
dvd a month, that is X dollars, you want Blueray as well, that is X+Y
dollars. I cannot image that it will be too long before Netflix has an SD
package and an HD package.

Consumers are most interested in paying for unlimited access, unless it is
overly expensive. I would rather pay comcast and netflix a set fee each
month instead of getting charged .$00001 each time I check my email.

On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 12:22 PM, JC Dill <jcdill.lists at gmail.com> wrote:

>  On 16/12/10 8:52 AM, Jack Bates wrote:
>
>> On 12/16/2010 9:17 AM, Mikel Waxler wrote:
>>
>>> Comcast can now charge its customers only for upkeep of its network and
>>> use
>>> the income they get as an "end point delivery network" to offset customer
>>> cost. Comcast's cost, which are upkeep and expansion of its physical
>>> network, now scale proportionally with its customer base.
>>>
>>
>> The problem with your layout is that, as a netflix user, I pay more to
>> netflix so that you can have their service over comcast, and my provider
>> doesn't get income from the netflix streams as it is sub 100k users (so I
>> still have to pay for my provider's upgrades to handle the netflix which
>> percentage wise will be higher than comcast due to less ideal bandwidth
>> discounts and the locality which may even drive up the overall percentage of
>> netflix streams per customer base).
>>
>
> Problem?  For Comcast, none of this is a problem.  (Do you see the problem
> now?)
>
> Again, I predict that things ARE heading in this direction, and that market
> forces and the current regulatory climate encourages it.  Dire news for
> small providers.  Saying you "want" it to be different[1] won't change
> anything.  I don't know what the solution is (if there is a solution) but so
> far all I see are people complaining "but if that happens, it's bad for me
> and for others".  Yes, it's bad.  What are you going to do to stop it?  If
> Comcast can continue to force other networks to pay it to carry data to
> Comcast's users, it will create a tidal wave of momentum in their favor for
> lowering rates and pushing other eyeball networks aside, buying them up or
> just taking over their territory and customers.
>
> jc
>
> [1]  I want a pony, etc.
>
>