Here's my theory on why it's happening: In typical big-company fashion, they're trying to price the new way of doing things out of existence rather than adapting to it. For decades, the cable television services have been in the business of selling television content, not the cable it comes in on. In this business model, it doesn't really matter whether people actually use your product -- you're paying the same subscriber fees and receiving the same subscription payment whether the television at the other end is on 10 minutes a day or 24 hours a day. They're finally realizing that the internet is going to make this model obsolete and that they're going to end up as little more than a last-mile connectivity service that actually has variable costs depending on how much their offerings are used. If I have to pay a premium to use someone else's video-on-demand service, they think that I'll use theirs instead. But I think they'll find it doesn't work that way.
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 08:39, Wrecks <[email protected]> wrote: > > My take on the "controversial consumption-based tiered broadband > pricing scheme" (TV related if you watch lots of streaming video)... > > At one time they used to charge for more email storage space. Then > Gmail came along, offering nearly unlimited email storage. Now just > about everyone else does too. > > Now would be a good time for someone to offer genuine high speed > broadband without throttling. Whoever does will have the broadband > equivalent of Gmail and the success that comes with it. > > > -- David J. Lynch [email protected] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ TV or Not TV .... Smart (TV) People on Ice! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
