|
|
|
|
|
|
by OGinparadise
4908 days ago
|
|
|
Earnings are what's left after they make their capital investments. And after they make all the investments they deem necessary, they're still posting large, stable, recurring profits. Ah yes, only non-telcos should show a profit for shareholders. My point, that you go out of your way to miss, is that 1. both sides are for profit corps 2. Free.fr and other might have to increase prices to keep up with demand 3. if Free.fr, Verizon or At&t imposed usage caps the same crowd would go after them with as much vigor. And bringing in Google is just a complete non-sequitur. AT&T can't afford to pay for upgrades because Google has a lot of money? Nonsense. How about let Google (or Netflix or ...) chip in? They are making a killing relative to telcos. |
|
|
None of those things are necessary. ISPs can make network improvements while posting stable profits without imposing usage caps or charging excessive prices. What they can't do is to do all of those things while making undeserved monopoly profits.
>How about let Google (or Netflix or ...) chip in? They are making a killing relative to telcos.
Heck, Walmart makes a lot of money too, why not have them pay for it?
If you want Google to pay for last mile improvements then move to Kansas City. I mean seriously, why should I pay AT&T if Google is the one paying to build the network? Why don't we just cut out the middle man and have Google run fiber to my house?