Convergence
Network operators will often say, “If there was a business case for symmetrical bandwidth, we'd have it. But there isn't, so we're not offering it.”
I finally understand what the problem is. It's convergence.
From the telco/cable point of view, convergence means having the power to provide triple/quadruple-plays on their own platform. Translated: they want to be able to charge different amounts for IPTV, VoIP, and internet data services that are carefully controlled and presented to users. That's convergence, and it's coming soon — or just as soon as we provide them with the proper incentives (power to charge) that will encourage them to build out their broadband networks.
For the rest of us, convergence is already here. There has been a 153% increase in VoIP subscribers in 2006 over 2005, with almost seven million subscribers in the U.S. According to The New York Times, the U.S. newspaper industry “appears to be in a free fall.” (have you seen www.crowdsourcing.com yet?) The advertising revenue on which offline broadcasters depend (up to $70 billion a year) is threatened by the online advertising market, which is growing quickly. So broadcasters are hedging their bets by making deals with YouTube. (Verizon has recently announced that it is in talks with YouTube to bring YouTube videos to its cellphone and broadband subscribers (signaling that those videos will not be available to those subscribers unless Verizon agrees to let them cross its networks)). Independent film-makers of all sizes and varieties (from Jib Jab to someone in her living room) are doing well online. As media is digitized for broadcast, it becomes available for online display, download, morphing, and transmittal. Online video is malleable, convivial, topical, and extremely popular (in the memorable words of Andy Oram here).
But the network providers want their kind of convergence, and that kind requires artificial scarcity. Including artificial scarcity of symmetrical bandwidth.
So — from their perspective, there's no business case. Makes perfect sense.
Brough Turner on the importance of telecom investment
In summary, the research draws the following conclusion: for a developing economy, investment in telecommunications is more productive than any other kind of investment — roads, electricity, or even education.
Report is here.
None of this is to downplay the developing world’s need for clean water, public health initiatives, and access to medical care, but if there is one area where capital investment provides outsized returns for individuals and nations, it is mobile telecom. And telecom is one area where developing nations can easily attract outside capital investment with regulatory policies that favor open access and competition. Best of all, mobile handsets work without a permanent electricity supply, people can use them without learning to read or write, and technology advances continuously drive down costs.