Re: Level 3 Communications Issues Statement Concerning Comcast's Actions

[Brandon Galbraith <brandon.galbraith () gmail com>]

On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 4:57 PM, William Warren <
hescominsoon () emmanuelcomputerconsulting com> wrote:

> On 11/29/2010 5:46 PM, Mark Wall wrote:
>
> > Between the lines: Comcast wants to end mutual peering agreements (due to:
> > ratios, politics , greed) but we are going to spin it due to net
> > neutrality
> >  making it main stream media and hoping we can get comcast clients to
> > complain...
> >
> > Not the worse angle we've seen
> >
> >
> >
> > >  I think Karl Denninger has this one called right:
> http://market-ticker.org/post=173522
I'd have to disagree with his viewpoint. If customer is using resource X and
you're not able to remain profitable, than you're not charging customer
enough for the resource in question. This is just a backdoor attempt to
raise the cost to the customer without them seeing it.

If Comcast were to raise the price to the customer directly, I think you'd
see defection to other services (if available in the area, like DSL or
Clearwire).

Doesn't Verizon FIOS provide 50-150Mb/s to the home now for the same cost as
Comcast? Exhorting a carrier of content to your customer can't be a good
business decision.

-- 
Brandon Galbraith
US Voice: 630.492.0464