Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 12 submissions in the queue.
posted by takyon on Friday January 25 2019, @07:50PM   Printer-friendly
from the net-reality dept.

Submitted via IRC for SoyCow1984

It's Now Clear None of the Supposed Benefits of Killing Net Neutrality Are Real

Network investment is down, layoffs abound, and networks are falling apart. This isn't the glorious future Ajit Pai promised.

In the months leading up to the FCC assault on net neutrality, big telecom and FCC boss Ajit Pai told anybody who'd listen that killing net neutrality would boost broadband industry investment, spark job creation, and drive broadband into underserved areas at an unprecedented rate.

As it turns out, none of those promises were actually true.

Despite the FCC voting to kill the popular consumer protections late last year, Comcast's latest earnings report indicates that the cable giant's capital expenditures (CAPEX) for 2018 actually decreased 3 percent. The revelation comes on the heels by similar statements by Verizon and Charter Spectrum that they'd also be seeing lower network investment numbers in 2018.

It's not expected to get any better in 2019. According to analysis this week by Wall Street research firm MoffettNathanson, capital spending among the nation's four biggest cable providers (Altice, Comcast, Charter Spectrum, CableONE) is expected to decline upwards of 5.8 percent this year.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @02:11PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 26 2019, @02:11PM (#792284)

    If we actually had a free market in ISPs there wouldn't be a problem with or without network neutrality. Unfortunately, what we really have is a bunch of state-granted local monopolies or duopolies who have a customer base that can't escape except by moving house, which is bloody expensive. My area, for instance, I've got a total of two choices: AT&T and SuddenLink. Both offer crap speeds and service at high price, because there's no competition available due to local monopoly. About three blocks away, AT&T offers their high speed UVerse stuff at reasonable prices. Solely because Google was planning to expand their fiber offering to that area (different county, same physical plant on the telecom infrastructure).

    So, for me, a Libertarian, I'd have been fine getting rid of network neutrality on the condition that the local monopolies got removed so there could be some, you know, actual competition, which is kind of a necessary component for capitalism to work. Right now, I'd say bring back the old Telecommunications Act of 1996 rules on line-sharing; that was when I had the best internet available.

    On the plus side, SpaceX's Starlink plans are set to bypass all the local monopolies entirely. Can't wait to see just how disruptive that's going to be. Watch for the established players like AT&T and Comcast to pitch a lobbyist fit to prevent it.