Reply to post: There's a difference between access providers and utility grids

India's ‘Facebook ruling’ is another nail in the coffin of the MNO model

LDS Silver badge

There's a difference between access providers and utility grids

Utility grids usually charge you a connection fee and then bill you by use (although lately contracts with a fixed cost and a cap are becoming more common) - so they don't matter much if they are "invisible", they have a steady revenue stream (especially since sometimes you can't easily switch supplier) - and sometimes can easily increase prices (i.e. because oil goes up...). These are also end-to-end services, they are not a direct link to someone else lucrative business, water pipes don't let you access Coca Cola or Budweiser services, you may still need electricity to run your computer, but the provider may not care less about what you use power for, the more you use, the better.

Internet acces providers have different issues. People are not keen on paying for data consumption, and are mostly used to fixed costs, usually without caps on fixed connections (ADLS, cable, etc.), although caps are still common for mobile ones. And competitive pressure makes difficult to increase prices (but for new, faster access technologies). It's not easy for them also to offer appealing premium services, because the Internet giants already offer them, which have already established worldwide brands and audience, difficult to make a dent into that offer.

They risk to be left the breadcrumbs just selling cheap connections to someone else lucrative business - no surprise they look for some kind of alliance with FB, Google & C. to ensure some kind of revenue stream, who cares if customers rights are crippled?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon


Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021