Quote:
Originally Posted by wizwor
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.
|
For all practical purposes, it's impossible to maintain a monopoly unless it's enforced or otherwise aided by the government. In the case of Comcast, it's monopoly was maintained by the various local governments. The biggest hurdle for companies who wish to compete with Comcast is the local governments which use their regulatory powers and control of utility right of way to keep other companies out.
I'm afraid that your analogy is a bit off. Comcast doesn't restrict traffic or charge a toll. Even with all the hysteria over Comcast throttling netflix traffic, it turned out that the issue wasn't Comcast throttling traffic, but rather the basic architecture of the internet, which doesn't give priority to any specific traffic and which sometimes routes traffic through congested nodes rather than uncongested nodes. The solution that Comcast and Netflix worked out was Comcast establishing a direct connection to Netflix for their customers rather than depending on the normal internet routing.