Verizon CEO: Heavy Bandwidth Users Should Pay More

February 28, 2014 - GamePolitics Staff

In a recent interview with IDG News Service, Verizon CEO Lowell McAdam said that customers who use lots of bandwidth should be charged more. People who download lots of files or stream content on a regular basis should naturally be charged, in his mind.

"It's only natural that the heavy users help contribute to the investment to keep the Web healthy," McAdam said during a conference call on Monday, as reported by IDG News Service. "That is the most important concept of net neutrality."

McAdam's comment illustrates why his company filed a lawsuit against the FCC to get the Open Internet Order invalidated. The D.C. District Court of Appeals made his dreams come true when it said that the FCC had no authority to regulate his company and other broadband carriers because it did not properly categorize them as "common carriers." With net neutrality rules invalidated, the future looks bright for Verizon, who can now start laying the groundwork to charge both content providers like Netflix and consumers who enjoy using those kinds of services extra.

McDowell also brushed aside concerns that Verizon would selectively block or throttle bandwidth access.

"We make our money by carrying traffic," he said. "That's how we make dollars. So to view that we're going to be advantaging one over the other really is a lot of histrionics, I think, at this point."

As usual companies like Microsoft, Sony, Activision, and EA remain silent on net neutrality. It's interesting because the services they provide eat up lots and lots of bandwidth. Perhaps, like Netflix, they will simply start paying for their traffic to be delivered through ISPs like Verizon and Comcast and pass the cost on to the end user...

Source: GameSpot


Comments

Re: Verizon CEO: Heavy Bandwidth Users Should Pay More

Its not natural if it has never been the norm. What is natural is them trying to nickel and dime us.

XBL/PSN Keegs79

Re: Verizon CEO: Heavy Bandwidth Users Should Pay More

Verizon CEO (and, in the end, all of the major telecoms): Let's see just how much more we can shake down our customers.

Re: Verizon CEO: Heavy Bandwidth Users Should Pay More

If you sell me a 12 Mbps (yes, megabits, not bytes) line, expect me to use it. Don't put a cap on it, don't charge me based on how I use it, charge me for the bandwidth you promised me and give me that bandwidth. It's quite simple. If you add another subscriber, you can't tell me that I now only get 6 Mbps. You can use the extra money you now receive from having more subscribers, to upgrade your networks so that all of your consumers get the bandwidth that you promised.

The best (and yet still not perfect) analogy I have come up with so far is a timeshare. If a company sells me a week at their resort, they can't later say, "Oh, well we didn't expect you to actually use your week, we expected you to use 2 days, so we oversold this timeshare, so if you want your whole week, you have to pay us extra."

This is far beyond the rising cost of doing business. This is straight up price gouging.

Re: Verizon CEO: Heavy Bandwidth Users Should Pay More

Verizon charges people for using SMS, which costs Verizon next to nothing since it piggy backs on what is essentially a heartbeat.  

That is the problem with the 'heavy users should pay more' argument, the companies only tend to make it one way and, for the most part, generall consider it 'heavy' when it is going to competitors' video service but it magically is fine when it is going to their own.  Though to be fair, since it stays inside their network it actually does impact them less, but the usage of the rhetoric still seems rather.. targeted.

Conceptually, I have no problem with paying for use, but the conflict of interests bothers me.  It should also be noted that Verizon already (and has for quite some time) charged for different usage patterns.  Looking at their site right now I see 6 different basic packages for Fios alone, more if you include their DSL and ISDN, or OC3 offerings.  So they already have plenty of tool for making people pay more for greater access.

All they seem to really want is the ability to advertise a certain capability in big red letters and then charge customers when they use that ability to buy from competing content providers.

I could just picture if GM owned a bunch of highways... "Yeah, a month pass for the turnpike is 5 bucks.  Wait, you are going to drive to the Ford dealer? How dare you use abuse our road, that will be 2 more bucks!"

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will Code Avarice's Paranautical Activity make its way back onto Steam?:
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician