Re: Monopoly = Artificial Scarcity
Terry, "I think you're really arguing for a regulated monopoly." That is -exactly- what I am arguing for. The last mile would be a -very- closely regulated monopoly. Only the last mile would be a monopoly. Call it "plumbing only." No data-centers, no ISP services, no TV channels, no movie studios, no streaming services--none of it. That's why it's called "the last mile." It's just wiring. It's not a sexy business, but it is a monopoly. It is the biggest hurdle to competition that there is in the telecom business right now. And probably for decades to come.
If we made such rules, with a firm set of guidelines as to the value of these assets, there would be thousands of bond issuers lined up to finance the purchase of this "last mile" by city governments, county councils, and private parties based on the usage fees (remember, carefully regulated) that they could collect from both end-user consumers and the "hookers-on." Many developers currently -already- pay for wiring up their new apartment buildings and subdivisions but expansion and maintenance fees would be carefully monitored and performance and profit limits would be set. That's what a regulated monopoly is. Bingo, you have hoards of ISP wanna-be's, and Netflixes, voice, and video and more, champing at the bit to get in this game.
Think about it: If your Comcast or Cox bill is currently $150 per month, how much do you think is going to depreciation, maintenance, and expansion of the WIRE? Ten bucks? Fifteen bucks? The rest goes to HBO, CBS, NBC, ESPN, Fox Sports, etc. How much goes to support Cox "Turbo" internet service? I'm sure as I'm sitting here that it's not much more than the cost of the wire. It shouldn't be one business that can price-gouge based on the fact that they own wire.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
