NET NEUTRALITY SOLUTION? NET COMPETITION

The Internet should not be looked at as a tollway. Some want to change the Information Superhighway into a bureaucratic tollway which does nothing for increasing regional economic development, but does do a lot for impeding our overall global competitiveness.

The sad thing is that most people in government do not see this because they are blinded and dazzled by those lobbyists from large incumbent phone companies and cable companies who want a regulatory framework that protects their cash cows and restricts competition. Competition is good, especially when it comes to alternative high-speed networks and communication services.

Many times, those in both state and federal regulatory positions are put in place as a political “thank you” for contributions and support, but are not put in place because they understand both the network technology as well as the economic underpinnings of how the network infrastructure layer supports the overall “Platform for Commerce”.

Where do they get their education as to the technology and its impact on society and the economy? They get it from the lobbyists who are constantly buzzing around them and giving them their insights on “what is best for the state or nation”. Their main function is to keep regulators in the dark when it comes to new technology and innovation, but keep them right on top of what is their corporate strategy’s best solution for the sustaining of the network architecture that is in place which the phone companies have made back their investment several times over already.

WAKE UP. LEARN THE GAME BEFORE YOU PLAY THE SPORT

There are many who want new services, but have no clue as to the capital investment involved in adding network infrastructure. This is a valid argument against those who have no clue when they expect faster services but do not realize that you have to pay for upgrades in network technology.

Nothing is free. It takes money to build a solid, high-speed network. That network needs to be fully redundant with no single-point-of-failure if those implementing want to attract
a quality customer base.

That being said, there are companies pharmacy that want to do this and pursue those in the market who want broadband connectivity.

Those start-up companies should be given the chance to build their networks and service clients. They would add another dimension to the current network services already offered. They would increase choices and spur competition which is good for the average consumer.

The incumbent companies do not want the competition. They would rather spend tens of millions of dollars on a negative ad campaign or a regulatory blitz of condemning and thwarting any type of start-up than improving their own network infrastructure which it growing more obsolete on a daily basis. This type of negative campaign actually happened several years ago when a municipality wanted to expand its electrical service to the residents of three municipalities. They were defeated by an aggressive ad campaign from the incumbent phone companies.

We should have the fastest and broadest-based network in the world. In networks and infrastructure technology, competition can make for a better market.

Look at Samsung and Apple. Their fierce competition has helped the market with better products being brought out and sold. The consumer is the winner and overall product innovation has been greatly accelerated.

Unfortunately with the network infrastructure, the consumer is the big loser and the incumbent phone companies are the big winners while they stagnate the market with under-performing products and services.

It is like what I said an earlier post, I did not get satisfaction from AT&T, so I had to go to another carrier to get a second line. See article – http://onpurposemagazine.com/2014/01/02/att-misses-the-mark-with-u-verse/

I found out that you cannot have two lines with U-Verse. Talk about not understanding where the market is, AT&T should be right out there with multiple U-Verse services to one house. If they don’t have the capacity to do that, let someone else in who does.

Our global competitiveness and overall ranking are more critical than AT&T and others trying to insure their profits on obsolete infrastructure.

CARLINI-ISM: Don’t have the latest broadband connectivity? Move over to let some new businesses into the market.
.