End of Net Neutrality

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Okay. Let's watch and see but allowing websites to pay to get speedy priority will always favour the wealthier websites. I see your boy, Pai, used a healthcare example but we know that won't be who will be dominating the speed buying.

Do you run a company that requires very high speed internet?

[siablo14]

No, ESPN would have the top spot- not the only spot.

And why would you use the decaying ESPN which is clearly in decline as an example? Haha.

ESPN would be faster so most people will go with the speedier access.

[AddiX]

No, ESPN would have the top spot- not the only spot.

And why would you use the decaying ESPN which is clearly in decline as an example? Haha.

Because they won't be in decline when they are the only option available.

Hence why these massive media companies want to end net neutrality so bad.

[siablo14]

Do you run a company that requires very high speed internet?

Average speed internet is fine but if my competitors are using speedy internet, I would have to match them.

[siablo14]

Because they won't be in decline when they are the only option available.

Hence why these massive media companies want to end net neutrality so bad.

Exactly...........

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Because they won't be in decline when they are the only option available.

Hence why these massive media companies want to end net neutrality so bad.

Why would they want to turn over everything to one client? Even given the top spot, they'd want others there, too. And if ESPN is willing to pay ten million, they deserve priority. How much would you be willing to pay? Or would I? If you can't buy advertising, then, how can make any money?

[siablo14]

Because he bigger websites and App developers will pay to get the most traffic via search, features, etc.

And they can also pay to get rid of the smaller guys.

This isn't rocket science. Why don't you actually read some articles before running your mouth for once.

Ding! Ding! That boy Jim can be naive at times.

[THREAD-KILLER]

The large telecom companies have already invested in infrastructure and have carved out their own territories. This is why you don't really have much choice on which ISP you use now.

[siablo14]

Why would they want to turn over everything to one client? Even given the top spot, they'd want others there, too. And if ESPN is willing to pay ten million, they deserve priority. How much would you be willing to pay? Or would I? If you can't buy advertising, then, how can make any money?

Take a look at the NFL and NBA TV rights contracts. Why did the NBA and NFL limit their content to a few channels?

[siablo14]

The large telecom companies have already invested in infrastructure and have carved out their own territories. This is why you don't really have much choice on which ISP you use now.

I know in my are in Atlanta it was just Comcast and AT&T. You would be angry with one and be about to switch but then you hear a friend who get service from the other provider with the same complaints that you have.

Same thing in Jamaica, two providers but it makes no sense to switch because they both give you the same issues. They should be treated as utility providers. These industries have high barriers to entry so not much firms will be running in to make it that competitive.