2. Wrong. The “craftiness” actually dates back to the AT&T “Ma Bell” era, where AT&T would sign up and bill far more customers than its hardware-based switch network could handle. Anyone trying to make a call on Mother’s Day can attest to that. We now live in an era where mobile operators sign-up and bill users knowing full well that network limitations will make it impossible for them to obtain advertised teaser data rates. That’s almost the definition of “crafty.”

3. Wrong. When is it in the end-user’s best interest not to obtain the best deal for their money? When it comes to video, consumers have choices: Netflix, Hulu, YouTube, Amazon.com, etc. Choices mean competition and better service at better prices. If mobile operators compete on an equal footing with existing video service providers, while good for consumers, it would limit the operators ability to set prices. Instead, operators will opt to limit or eliminate the competition by limiting their access to the operator’s pipes. Bad for end users.

4. Wrong. Moving to a service based business model would only allow the crafty homogenous mobile operator barons to put the squeeze on both content providers and content consumers. Instead, consumers should recognize that fundamentally mobile operators provide bytes and that we should insist that they use investment and innovation to provide as many bytes as possible at fair prices in a competitive environment.

Finally,

“A little more balanced coverage please. Operators need a little love too :-)”

Just because you don’t agree with a particular commentator’s points doesn’t mean the coverage isn’t balanced. However, making such a claim without basis is good evidence for bias. Further, I’ll give the carriers a little love when they do the same for their customers …

Our firm Box Top Solutions has been looking into these developments as well and sees a new trend evolving that should actually help users (especially low income or unconnected users) get and stay online for free or very low cost. The trend is “toll-free web apps” where the sender (govt agency, content provider, merchant) arranges to have their content bytes sent for free (or subsidized) to the end user (just like a 1-800 voice call in the days of high long distance charges) by pre-loading free bandwidth packages into their particular app (Android, webOS, etc.). As markets see more and more data caps, people will save their bytes for higher value content (as scarcity dictates), thereby driving content providers to aggressively compete for the attention of these customers by shouldering the burden of bandwidth on behalf of their customers (just like merchants did with 1-800 phone lines). In addition, the regulators should also like the model (we call it “FreeBand”) since it is just one more choice for an end user (FreeBand does not limit existing tariff options for end users, but adds to them).

In fact, this free delivery model is exactly what Netflix does today with their DVDs — they provide “free delivery of the bytes” (which are encased in the plastic DVDs) by paying the US postal service for freight charges. Their free bytes delivery model has been a huge success and it is just a matter of time before this model for the free shipment of bytes makes its way into the Internet delivery market — helping end users avoid high bandwidth charges each month. So while data caps may cause short-term pain in certain markets, it will also drive long-term innovation in others and make many forms of connectivity more affordable for end users — whether that toll-free connectivity is tied to govt services, education, job training, healthcare, or simply downloading movies. As for what content will come bundled with free bandwidth, the “invisible hand” of the market will dictate the app bundles just like it does for all other forms of free delivery (books, flowers, pizzas, DVDs, etc.).

The fact is that charging for services rendered according to what they cost is both reasonable and fair. But GigaOm’s sponsor, Google, wants to suck all of the money out of the Internet ecosystem and so doesn’t want ISPs to make a dime… and, apparently, GigaOm is going along. Zero journalistic integrity.

It reminds me of how we pay separately for calling and texting. Both services are way overpriced in terms of data usage, even next to your ridiculously expensive data plan.