In theory, this is nice. In reality, monopoly exists. That's why there are antitrust laws. In the case of cable, the monopoly was created to mitigate risks associated with investing in infrastructure. This monopoly was tempered with concessions to the public good. Over the generations, the risks have disappeared, concessions have evaporated, and the internet happened. Cable industry consolidation and 'bundling' have, for the most part left the largest providers without competition. Where market forces have created competitors, the cable industry has used litigation and bribery to tamp it out. The consequence -- higher prices, less innovation, and little choice.
When Wal-mart built a new store where my parents live, they built the store between existing retailers and the Massachusetts border so that their store is the first retailer people coming from that sales tax state into sales tax free New Hampshire would encounter. Wal-mart improved the roads leading to the facility -- adding lanes and lights. Imagine if Wal-mart reserved the new lanes for traffic to their store. Imagine if Wal-mart controlled the lights in a way that restricted traffic past their store. Imagine if Wal-mart charged a toll to those traveling past their store. Some might bear the tax and traffic to teach Wal-mart a lesson, but most would shop at Wal-mart. That is what Comcast has done.
I don't want to create another monster to deal with the cable industry. I don't want to put Comcast out of business. I just want to make sure they do not put everyone else out of business. Since Comcast is a publicly held company, the best way to do that is to simply outlaw bundling of transport and media.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sregener
Whenever an exchange happens on the free market, it only happens because both sides believe they come out ahead in the deal. If consumers believe they are losing out, they won't purchase the product. Consumers can only be gouged when they are forced to make an exchange.
In the short run, Comcast may be able to take advantage of their market position. But they will create an incentive for competitors to enter those markets, and if enough people switch to a different service, they'll find their practices to be against their best interests and change them.
Any time there is a developing market, which Internet-delivered television definitely is, there are periods of adjustment and growth. Nobody needs television, and nobody needs it to be streamed to their home. It is a luxury good, and doubly so when we're talking about Internet-delivered video. And luxury goods often go through periods of high prices before they become commodities.
We might as well be arguing the price of yachts.
|