Verizon looks for income on both sides of the web page

Ok, we all get the fact that without the network we can't reach out and touch someone like Google or Microsoft. Heck, we're paying hard-earned dollars to use that network every day, but Verizon appears to want more. Not from us (well maybe they do since we can't use our existing EV-DO plan for the new Treo 700w), but from the big boys providing web service. Top dog of Verizon, Ivan Seidenberg, wants those service providers we love so much to buck up and "share the cost" of broadband networks. Yo, Ivan: we'd be less worried about Microsoft, Google and the like. Not that we want to see this, but perhaps focusing on a better anti-Skype strategy would be more appropriate. Besides, if you start double-dipping for web services on your network, they're likely to go away along with the consumers that wanna use 'em.

[JREAU @ Jan 6th 2006 11:38AM]

You guys are making this up. No way is this gonna fly.

[thegrey @ Jan 6th 2006 12:15PM]

Just great. Not only can my cell phone not work inside my house. Now i have to pay 2x as much to use Verizon as my ISP....

[quixote @ Jan 6th 2006 12:33PM]

I'm an unwilling Verizon customer, and every word of this sounds exactly like the sort of thing they'd do. Once my contract is up, I'm outta there. If I get much madder, I may not wait that long. Money isn't everything.

[Mark @ Jan 6th 2006 12:51PM]

"Not that we want to see this, but perhaps focusing on a better anti-Skype strategy would be more appropriate."



They already have an anti-Skype strategy: block (or downgrade) any VOIP traffic that isn't their own. Network neutrality, you say? There's no law mandating it, and the FCC doesn't look like it will enforce it, so there's no such thing.



They could do this. They could absolutely do this. Of course, customers would just flock to their competitors if (say) Google stopped being available through Verizon's network because the company chose not to pay Verizon's access tax, so they'd have to do it in concert with other internet backbone companies. And that would certainly look like a trust, which would violate the law. But it would probably be a few years before the government prosecuted them (particularly with the telecomm lobby in Congress encouraging them to look the other way) and it would take another several years before a decision was brought, appealed, and appealed again. In the meantime, all sorts of damage would be done to companies like Google, AOL, Microsoft, and Yahoo. Maybe enough damage that they'd just go ahead and pay the tax, or (better yet) merge with the telecomm companies so that they could be the ones blocking out access to their competitors. This could easily get very, very ugly.

[Steven J. Ackerman @ Jan 6th 2006 2:19PM]

Yep - this is for real. I blogged about this Internet Payola scheme back on December 1st. My 'bits' are better than your 'bits':



http://spaces.msn.com/members/sjackerman/Blog/cns!1p9Wku8EmD6Jkxcpcsio6s8A!234.entry

[Matthew Winship @ Jan 6th 2006 4:14PM]

SBC was the first to mention this. The simple solution to the problem is don't charge less than your cost for broadband. Verizon's losing their shirt on $14.99 DSL and they need to recover the money from someone, so why not extort it from others.

[franzy belfort @ Jan 6th 2006 4:48PM]

I think a lot of us are missing the bigger picture here. For all the great things that come from Microsoft, Yahoo & Google, they are all making money from advertising and service. But who pays for the pipe that provides all of this great stuff? Everybody wants music, video voip and massive bandwidth, but who is paying for it? Not us and definitely not the service providers. And before you say "well they get to charge for dsl/dial up access" remember that there are now companies like Skype, Vonage and other voips who's entire business model is based on using other people's pipes to provide service and then undercutting the original company. Of course voip companies can charge a great price for their services, they have no overhead and they don't pay for infrastructure or upgrades, or maintenance. I don't remember it being a yahoo repair truck that repair the fiber which allowed my block to go online. It would be the exact same thing as if Amazon put up a booth in Barnes and noble, used their bathroom and electricity and then sold books at a 20% discount because they could afford to. There is no such thing as a free lunch in nature, and there shouldn't be in business either. I applaud Verizon and AT&T for standing up for their rights when something is so far out of balance as this. If this go thru, the service providers should pay it for the same reasons that I pay rent for my business location and for the same reasons we pay for our game consoles and everything else.

[Mark @ Jan 6th 2006 8:23PM]

"But who pays for the pipe that provides all of this great stuff?"



We pay for it, through the monthly fees we pay to get Internet connectivity. You're acting like companies like Google and Yahoo are stealing access. Telecomm companies invested in laying fiber because they intended to charge customers fees in order to get their data through those pipes. And why are we willing to pay those fees? Because companies like Google and Yahoo are providing services that we want to access. Those companies provide the value of Verizon's network. So why should the charges flow both ways? Verizon should count themselves lucky that they don't have to pay Google and Yahoo for the right to connect their customers to those services.



You're either profoundly ignorant or a corporate troll.

[franzy belfort @ Jan 9th 2006 9:07AM]

"You're either profoundly ignorant or a corporate troll."



Let me make sure I understand this. If somebody doesn't agree with your juvenile, baseless argument they are either ignorant or working for the other side?!?

Let's remember economics 101, every company in the world is out to make money. That is not evil or greedy it just is. if it weren't for that we would have no ipod or laptop, or any other high end electronic item, there would be no incentive. Without the pipes companies like yahoo and goggles would never exist, since they would have no customers. both the telcos and the content providers need each other. All that's needed is a fair and balanced business model. Because you little $30.00 a month does not begin to cover the cost of maintaining the current lines and installing new ones. Why is it that every idiot believe that they are entitled to everything staying the same forever?