You are here

Competition

Don’t Miss Great AEI Report on EU Lagging US in Broadband

Anyone interested in broadband policy should not miss the excellent new research of Roslyn Layton, an AEI Internet economist, who has studied European broadband progress as compared to America’s.

Let me flag two big research takeaways that should not be missed.

  • “… per capita [broadband] investment in the U.S. is twice that of Europe, and the gap is growing.”
  • Then there is the claim that Americans pay more for broadband than Europeans. As I point out in my report, critics forget to include the impact of value added taxes (as high as 27% in some countries) and compulsory media license fees (adding hundreds of dollars per year to the cost of every broadband subscription). When accounting for these real differences, Americans pay less for broadband.”

These findings affirm the wisdom of America’s market-led broadband policy that encourages facilities-based broadband competition over the EU’s lagging, common carrier, monopoly-unbundling, approach to broadband.   

NetCompetition Statement on Comcast-Time Warner Cable Merger

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

 

February 13, 2014

 

Contact:  Scott Cleland 703-217-2407

 

The Comcast-Time Warner Cable Merger is Pro-competitive,

 

The Communications Marketplace Has Never Been More Competitive,

 

And American Consumers Have Never Had More Communications Choices

 

Mobile & Cloud Competition & Innovation are Dynamically Changing Communications 

 

WASHINGTON D.C. – The following quotes on the announcement of the Comcast-Time-Warner Cable merger may be attributed to Scott Cleland, Chairman of NetCompetition:

 

  • “Not only is the Comcast-Time Warner Cable merger pro-competitive, via the improvement of services and innovation for millions of Americans and many thousands of businesses, this merger also is occurring in the most competitive communications marketplace with the most consumer choices ever. It should be approved”

 

Government Broadband Overbuilds Are Anticompetitive – Part 5 Big GoverNet series

For those interested in municipal broadband overbuilds and their effect on competition, please read my latest Daily Caller op-ed: “Government Broadband Overbuilds Are Anticompetitive.”

  • This is Part 5 of my Big GoverNet research series.

***

Big GoverNet research series:

Part 1: Cities learning there is no wireless “free lunch” [9-20-07]

Part 2: Why the Australian “Fiber Mae” Broadband Model Doesn’t Work for the U.S. [5-13-09]

Part 3: Why Broadband is not a Public Utility [8-21-09]

How the Google-EC Competition Deal Harms Europe – My Daily Caller Op-ed

Please read my latest Daily Caller op-ed: “How the Google-EC Competition Deal Harms Europe” – here.

  • It is Part 31 of my Google Unaccountability research series.

***

Google Unaccountability Series

NetCompetition Release on Comm Act Update House Submission

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE January 31, 2014

Contact:  Scott Cleland 703-217-2407

WASHINGTON D.C. – The following quotes addressing Chairmen Upton & Walden’s requests for input on modernizing the Communications Act may be attributed to Scott Cleland, Chairman of NetCompetition:

Nattering Net Neutrality Nonsense over AT&T’s Sponsored Data Offering – Part 23 Broadband Pricing Freedom Series

Net neutrality activists’ criticism of AT&T’s new freebie for consumers called Sponsored Data is nonsensical.

AT&T’s pricing innovation creates a new freebie for consumers and a new freedom for web providers of Internet content, apps and devices that is fully in keeping with any reasonable notion of a free and open Internet.

AT&T’s Sponsored Data offering is no different from other business freebies offered to consumers to market and competitively differentiate their businesses like: Amazon’s free shipping and free Kindle wireless service; Apple’s free messaging and video conferencing; Google’s free Search, Fiber, Maps, Mobile Operating System, and video conferencing offerings; or Yahoo’s free email. A full list of all free and open Internet consumer freebies would be endless.

AT&T’s Sponsored Data innovation is no different from sponsored ads, website sponsors, content sponsors or any other kind of Internet sponsor.

It is nonsensical for net neutrality activists to not be open to yet another free web service. On what reasonable basis is a consumer freebie from AT&T different than a consumer freebie offered by any other competitor in the Internet ecosystem?

Perspective on the FCC’s Special Access Delay of its IP Transition – Part 7 Special Access Series

FCC staff just muffed an easy opportunity to advance the IP transition on the FCC’s timetable in the National Broadband Plan.

Apparently FCC staff missed the big picture here.

1. On November 25th, AT&T proposed a baby step forward in the IP Transition.

AT&T did not propose any change in special access rates. AT&T simply proposed that its special access contract term-lengths, synch up with the FCC’s own goals for when the IP transition should be complete.

Instead of promoting investment certainty -- by respecting its own IP transition timetable that the private sector has come to rely on for infrastructure investment planning -- FCC staff announced an unnecessary five-month investigative delay.  

Why Chairmen Upton/Walden Plan a Communications Act Update – Daily Caller Op-ed

Please don’t miss my latest Daily Caller op-ed “Why Chairmen Upton/Walden Plan a Communications Act Update” – here.

The op-ed provides a foundational answer to both:

  • Chairman Upton/Walden’s organizing question: “…is this working for today’s communications marketplace?” and
  • Representative Dingell’s core question: What is the need for change?

This is Part 21 of my Obsolete Communications Law Series.

***

FYI: See additional background below: two key PowerPoint presentations & my Obsolete Communications Law Series.

FCC Shouldn’t Pick Wireless Technologies

Some wireless competitors and the DOJ/OSTP are urging the FCC to effectively change their spectrum aggregation rules to treat low-band spectrum-technology <1 GHz competitively different than high-band spectrum-technology >1 GHz.

If the FCC complies, it effectively would subdivide the current spectrum marketplace into two technology markets: <1GHz and >1GHz, for the first time in twenty years of spectrum auction history. It also would set the precedent for the FCC to arbitrarily subdivide the spectrum market further in future auctions based on the FCC’s latest technology-mix prognostications at that time.

Big picture, it would represent a regression back towards the 1980s pre-auction period when the FCC, not competitive market auctions, decided which company got what spectrum, and how certain spectrum was allocated.

YouTube is Ultimate a la Carte – My Daily Caller Op-ed

 

Please see my latest Daily Caller op-ed, “YouTube is Ultimate a la Carte” – here -- on Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Rockefeller’s new legislation: “Consumer Choice in Online Video Act.”

 

  • It is Part 21 of my Broadband Internet Pricing Freedom series.

 

Broadband Internet Pricing Freedom Series

 

Part 1: Netflix' Glass House Temper Tantrum Over Broadband Usage Fees [7-26-11]

 

Pages

Q&A One Pager Debunking Net Neutrality Myths