Net Nuetrality Thoughts
A lot of people are screaming of the doom and gloom and others are optimistic about what will happen without Net Neutrality laws. And while it is difficult to be sure of anything when you aren't the one making the decisions we can look at business trends to get an idea of where things will go.
Firstly, if you're optimistic, then you may have been in the camp support the repeal of the laws. But, the fact remains, if no one will abuse the system, then keeping the laws in place only served as assurance of the lack of abuse. You don't simply remove a law because no one is running afoul of it. Laws exist not JUST to punish offenders, but to also deter.
Secondly, it isn't as though someone woke and decided, "you know, maybe we should just abolish that law". No, it was lobbied for. Which means that someone wants the law removed so that it will enable them to do something which illegal prior.
Thirdly, that doesn't mean that all hell will break loose. But, it does mean that somewhere out there are people who lobbied for congress to repeal this law so that they could do something. Which almost certainly means you'll start seeing business practices popping up in the future, doing things which would have been illegal last year.
So what does it look like? My best guess. Nothing immediate will change. I'm reminded of when phone prices started creeping up into the $1000 range and carriers started wanting to drop their subsidies. None of the big players ever totally dropped it. Now they have add-ons which serve as financing. But, most phones still come at a discount if bought on one of these plans.
In short, companies with competition won't generally want to be the first ones to openly and blatantly make a move against the consumers best interest. Because, then their competition will simply scoop up all of the unhappy customers by not acting.
Instead, what is more likely to happen is a bait and switch scenario as happened with cell phones. Or it will be applied to new services and offerings.
What carriers did to backdoor this in was simple. They created plans which were cheaper than their original plans for BYOD customers and offered monthly payment options for those that didn't have a phone to bring or wanted a new one. Then, over time, they let the price of the BYOD plans go up, and left the extra charge in place. And, they even went further and created tiered plans which offer more services, but also add back in an outright subsidy which can increase with the cost of the base plan. And where we are is, most phone companies have phased out all affordable plans which offered a subsidy.
Expect something similar with Net Neutrality repealed. You might start to see new packages being offered which are as good, or better in price or services. But come with certain caveats on usage. They may make the traditional packages increase in cost or even disappear to drive adoption. And then, after a certain point, they may start letting the new packages creep up in price.
I mean, it is pretty simple. Your internet provider could partner with Netflix. They bundle a Netflix subscription in with certain packages. Netflix offers the ISP a cut of the profits, but on the condition that they cap speeds on known torrenting sites, and maybe even a bit to some of Netflix's competition. With the kickback from Netflix on top of the ability to legally throttle some common bandwidth hogs, the ISP can EASILY justify racheting down the price by a tantalizing amount. Especially, if they know they can simply change the prices over time.
That is just one example of how this bait and switch could work. And I'm sure you'll see some of them.
But, what I expect is more likely is new services to exploit this. There is still a lot of room for new Netflix like services. And many content providers either also own, or have a stake in ISP companies. And, where they don't, new startups can leverage this to get a chance to break into that business. I expect to see it start out as ISPs offering brand new services bundled with otherwise incredibly restrictive internet access, but at dirt cheap prices.
Or, perhaps, they sneak it in under the radar. Let's say you paid for 25MBS internet. But, you want to watch 4k Netflix. Your ISP could partner with Netflix. Netflix pays the ISP a little extra, and the ISP let's Netflix run 100MBS on your connection.
But then, that isn't really all that different from the previous scenario. What will likely happen is a lot of people will switch to lower bandwidth packages making it cheaper for the ISP to operate the infrastructure while services like Netflix and other pay a small fee to ensure that their users get a good experience. In this case, they make the benefits "free" to the end user. But still leverage the lack of Net Neutrality to profit via bandwidth prioritization.
Now, this last scenario paints a picture. It isn't necessarily bad. And perhaps that is a part of the reason it was successfully repealed. There are definitely ways to leverage throttling techniques which don't necessarily have a negative impact for the consumer or create unfair competition. But, now there are also no laws to stop such practices.
You could wake up tomorrow and find your ISP has partnered with Amazon who want to push Prime TV, and they may have offered your ISP a sickening amount of money to throttle every other streaming services into the gutter.
At the end of the day. Repealing the law was a bad move in my opinion. I think that the laws could have been amended to protect competition and consumers while still open up new tools to businesses for competition. But, that is just my opinion.
Firstly, if you're optimistic, then you may have been in the camp support the repeal of the laws. But, the fact remains, if no one will abuse the system, then keeping the laws in place only served as assurance of the lack of abuse. You don't simply remove a law because no one is running afoul of it. Laws exist not JUST to punish offenders, but to also deter.
Secondly, it isn't as though someone woke and decided, "you know, maybe we should just abolish that law". No, it was lobbied for. Which means that someone wants the law removed so that it will enable them to do something which illegal prior.
Thirdly, that doesn't mean that all hell will break loose. But, it does mean that somewhere out there are people who lobbied for congress to repeal this law so that they could do something. Which almost certainly means you'll start seeing business practices popping up in the future, doing things which would have been illegal last year.
So what does it look like? My best guess. Nothing immediate will change. I'm reminded of when phone prices started creeping up into the $1000 range and carriers started wanting to drop their subsidies. None of the big players ever totally dropped it. Now they have add-ons which serve as financing. But, most phones still come at a discount if bought on one of these plans.
In short, companies with competition won't generally want to be the first ones to openly and blatantly make a move against the consumers best interest. Because, then their competition will simply scoop up all of the unhappy customers by not acting.
Instead, what is more likely to happen is a bait and switch scenario as happened with cell phones. Or it will be applied to new services and offerings.
What carriers did to backdoor this in was simple. They created plans which were cheaper than their original plans for BYOD customers and offered monthly payment options for those that didn't have a phone to bring or wanted a new one. Then, over time, they let the price of the BYOD plans go up, and left the extra charge in place. And, they even went further and created tiered plans which offer more services, but also add back in an outright subsidy which can increase with the cost of the base plan. And where we are is, most phone companies have phased out all affordable plans which offered a subsidy.
Expect something similar with Net Neutrality repealed. You might start to see new packages being offered which are as good, or better in price or services. But come with certain caveats on usage. They may make the traditional packages increase in cost or even disappear to drive adoption. And then, after a certain point, they may start letting the new packages creep up in price.
I mean, it is pretty simple. Your internet provider could partner with Netflix. They bundle a Netflix subscription in with certain packages. Netflix offers the ISP a cut of the profits, but on the condition that they cap speeds on known torrenting sites, and maybe even a bit to some of Netflix's competition. With the kickback from Netflix on top of the ability to legally throttle some common bandwidth hogs, the ISP can EASILY justify racheting down the price by a tantalizing amount. Especially, if they know they can simply change the prices over time.
That is just one example of how this bait and switch could work. And I'm sure you'll see some of them.
But, what I expect is more likely is new services to exploit this. There is still a lot of room for new Netflix like services. And many content providers either also own, or have a stake in ISP companies. And, where they don't, new startups can leverage this to get a chance to break into that business. I expect to see it start out as ISPs offering brand new services bundled with otherwise incredibly restrictive internet access, but at dirt cheap prices.
Or, perhaps, they sneak it in under the radar. Let's say you paid for 25MBS internet. But, you want to watch 4k Netflix. Your ISP could partner with Netflix. Netflix pays the ISP a little extra, and the ISP let's Netflix run 100MBS on your connection.
But then, that isn't really all that different from the previous scenario. What will likely happen is a lot of people will switch to lower bandwidth packages making it cheaper for the ISP to operate the infrastructure while services like Netflix and other pay a small fee to ensure that their users get a good experience. In this case, they make the benefits "free" to the end user. But still leverage the lack of Net Neutrality to profit via bandwidth prioritization.
Now, this last scenario paints a picture. It isn't necessarily bad. And perhaps that is a part of the reason it was successfully repealed. There are definitely ways to leverage throttling techniques which don't necessarily have a negative impact for the consumer or create unfair competition. But, now there are also no laws to stop such practices.
You could wake up tomorrow and find your ISP has partnered with Amazon who want to push Prime TV, and they may have offered your ISP a sickening amount of money to throttle every other streaming services into the gutter.
At the end of the day. Repealing the law was a bad move in my opinion. I think that the laws could have been amended to protect competition and consumers while still open up new tools to businesses for competition. But, that is just my opinion.
Comments
Post a Comment