PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| reply to JTRockville
Re: Broadband Strategy = Decades-Old Video Franchise Process
Well, the "decades-old video franchise process", so derided by the telcos these days, has resulted in the following effects:
--the U.S. has a more advanced Cable TV build-out then just about any other country. No where else will you find cable networks leading teleco networks.
--cable is ubiquitious, and even widely available in poor and minority neighborhoods. This is primarily due to build-out requirements embodied in local franchise argeements.
The argument that no regulation whatsoever will lead to the best outcome for consumers seems based on ideological beliefs, rather than experience or economics. It conveniently ignores the effects of market failure in certain instances.
The BB "policy" adopted by the current Powers That BE seems like it will result in a portion of the population having the choice of multiple, high-performance, low-cost suppliers, while much of the remaining population will have no options, or one very expensive one. This is what I've called the Starbucks Deployment Model: with no national policy on where to site Starbucks stores, a portion of the population has access to Designer Coffee at every street corner, while a significant portion of the population has none. This is fine for something as trivial as an overpriced beverage, but if you believe broadband is more important than that, it is disheartening to see what other countries have been able to do with more aggressive policies. |
|
John Galt
Forward, March
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
 ·CenturyLink
| said by PDXPLT  :This is what I've called the Starbucks Deployment Model: with no national policy on where to site Starbucks stores, a portion of the population has access to Designer Coffee at every street corner, while a significant portion of the population has none. And where is the outrage regarding this Caffeine Divide??
This is fine for something as trivial as an overpriced beverage, but if you believe broadband is more important than that, it is disheartening to see what other countries have been able to do with more aggressive policies. Well, at BBR readers are encouraged to get 1) Get Coffee 2) Read Morning Broadband Bytes 3) Et Cetera...
It is obvious where THEY stand on the issue.
--
A is A |
|
Michieru2
zzz zzz zzz
Premium
join:2005-01-28
Miami, FL
| reply to PDXPLT
"The argument that no regulation whatsoever will lead to the best outcome for consumers seems based on ideological beliefs, rather than experience or economics. It conveniently ignores the effects of market failure in certain instances."
In theory it is but in reality it could both either way and that's where regulation comes in. I know I said in previous posts that less government regulation is a good thing. I still believe that because some regulations are simply too ridiculous and then they are other's that make sense. Consumers want to extract companies of there profits and as someone who is studying business I see that as a huge problem it's basically beating up the entrepreneur of any financing and could make the business fail if too much regulation is put on top which eventually causes a business failure and then the consumer is left without a choice, because they extracted the company from any success and profits are used to expand or make a good/service better. Again in theory but that's what makes a business strive when businesses begin to think on only the cash they simply secure themselves in the market place and act as some giant leach. While shoving new competitors out of the way.
But humans are greedy and eventually you will feel the pressure of those of your peer's asking for more and more profits. Because money = power in the business world. Companies build large skyscrapers for workers + other things but they also built it as a sense of economic power and when large businesses strive in America that makes the US look good. But such balances are rarely seen and you can never expect them to last forever.
(Sorry I just like economics and still reading up on it  ) |
|
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to John Galt
said by John Galt :said by PDXPLT :This is what I've called the Starbucks Deployment Model: with no national policy on where to site Starbucks stores, a portion of the population has access to Designer Coffee at every street corner, while a significant portion of the population has none. And where is the outrage regarding this Caffeine Divide?? To be honest there is not a Starbucks within 50 miles of me, literally. Not that I really care anyways. |
|
