You are here

Competition

U.S. Competition Beats EU Regulation in Broadband Race – Part 30 – FCC Open Internet Order Series

They were so wrong. To justify FCC market intervention, U.S. proponents of EU-style, heavy-handed broadband regulation trumpeted the narrative that the U.S. was falling behind the world in broadband.

The pro-regulation chorus of Free Press, Save the Internet, Public Knowledge, Susan Crawford, the Harvard Berkman Center, et al, sung from the same made-up song sheet that American business was failing and Government needed to take control of broadband networks to restore American leadership and prevent private enterprise from discriminating and censoring Americans free speech.

Now we know how tall a tale these pro-regulation pressure groups were willing to spin to advance their interventionist net neutrality agenda.

Facts are pesky things and the facts show that the U.S. is strongly leading the EU in the broadband race. It is so obvious even top EU officials admit the EU “needs to catch up.”

Let’s review the latest facts.

The New U.S. Spectrum Policy Has Big Problems – Part 9 -- Government Spectrum Waste Fraud & Abuse Series

Please see my latest Daily Caller op-ed: "The New U.S. Spectrum Policy Has Big Problems” -- here.

  • It critiques the new Presidential Memorandum: “Expanding America’s Leadership in Wireless Innovation.”
  • It is also Part 9 of my Government Spectrum Waste, Fraud & Abuse Research Series.

* * * * *

The FCC/DOJ’s One Gigahertz Spectrum Charade – My Daily Caller Op-ed & Part 8 of Government Spectrum Waste, Fraud & Abuse Series

Please see my latest Daily Caller op-ed: "FCC/DOJ’s One Gigahertz Spectrum Charade" -- here.

  • It is Part 8 of my Government Spectrum Waste, Fraud & Abuse Research Series.

* * * * *

Government Spectrum Waste Fraud and Abuse Research Series

More Legal Trouble for FCC’s Open Internet Order & Net Neutrality -- Part 29 FCC Open Internet Order Series

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals 3-0 decision to overturn the FCC in Comcast v. FCC/Tennis Channel spells more trouble for the ultimate legality of the FCC’s Open Internet Order. That decision spotlights that three additional D.C. Circuit Appeals Court’s judges do not agree with the FCC’s reading of the law and the facts concerning lawful network discrimination.

On the margin, this new decision should make Verizon more confident and the FCC less confident in the outcome of Verizon v. FCC.

Overall, I believe Verizon remains more likely than not to prevail in its challenge of the FCC net neutrality regulations in the FCC’s Open Internet Order, because Verizon only needs to prevail with one of its many strong arguments while the FCC must win on all of them.

How is this latest D.C. Circuit decision relevant to the FCC Open Internet order case?

Google’s Antitrust Rap Sheet Updated – Part 24 Google Unaccountability Series

Three new Google antitrust developments in just the last few weeks warrant an update to Google’s ominously-growing Antitrust Rap Sheet; see it here.

America's private video market success -- My Daily Caller Op-ed

Please see my latest Daily Caller op-ed: "America's private video market success" here.

  • It debunks Free Press' diatribe against cable to try and promote net neutrality regulation and a ban on usage-based broadband pricing.
  • It is Part 16 of my broadband Internet pricing freedom research series.  

* * * * *
Broadband Internet Pricing Freedom Research Series

Part 1:    Netflix' Glass House Temper Tantrum Over Broadband Usage Fees

Wireless Plan Innovation Benefits Consumers & Competition -- Part 15 Broadband Internet Pricing Freedom Series

Please see my latest Daily Caller Op-ed "Wireless Plan Innovation Benefits Consumers & Competition -- here.

  • It debunks net neutrality criticism of a reported potential ESPN-wireless pricing experiment.
  • It is also Part 15 of my Broadband Internet Pricing Freedom research series.

* * * * *

Broadband Internet Pricing Freedom Research Series

Part 1:    Netflix' Glass House Temper Tantrum Over Broadband Usage Fees

Wireless competition: What’s the data say?

The CTIA just released its semi-annual statistics on the wireless industry’s performance, and its bad news for all those supposed data-driven, pro-regulation proponents who are in search of evidence or data to justify regulating wireless or wireless spectrum holdings.

The data are more powerful evidence of a competitive wireless industry. Hopefully, this data will nudge the FCC to begrudgingly conclude that the industry is indeed competitive, despite their blinders to the data.

Briefly, the U.S. wireless industry:

What Do Dish-Sprint, Google Fiber, & T-Mobile’s No Contracts, All Mean?

Competition is alive and well in the U.S. communications market.

Market forces have produced a barrage of big competitive developments in just a few weeks. Dish’s disruptive $25b bid for Sprint could offer consumers a new choice of a lower-price, faster-speed, all-wireless platform for the first time. Google’s disruptive ongoing expansion of Google Fiber from Kansas City to Austin Texas and Provo Utah signals more and new consumers could increasingly enjoy the choice of a new, much-faster, near-comprehensively-integrated broadband offering. And T-Mobile is disrupting in yet another major way with a new maverick wireless pricing model that offers no contract plans and relatively more a la carte pricing.  

These developments are proof positive why competition is so far superior to regulation. Survival is a powerful motivator to disrupt, differentiate and innovate, just as the opportunity for large profit and market leadership are powerful motivators as well.

While regulators slowly fret over how they can solve yesterday’s problems by fiat or opaque subsidy, competition is automatically devising alternative solutions to today’s problems, and inevitably is working on different solutions to tomorrow’s problems.  

I.    Dish-Sprint

Pages

Q&A One Pager Debunking Net Neutrality Myths