Expensive Zero Sum?

Comcast is boosting its capital spending by about 20 percent for 2007, a move that has at least some investors upset. The thinking is that cable plant now is supposed to be "future proof."

Still, Comcast Chairman Brian Roberts says “we can capture market share now” if Comcast invests. Roberts is right about that. But there's a longer term issue. At some point, bundling, Triple and Quad Plays will result in lower average revenue per unit, and are fundamentally a zero sum game. Contestants can trade share, but can't grow the market if that's all they do. They pretty much know that.

Bundling will help some contestants. But it is no recipe for growth. Incumbents know that as well. At some point, at least some disruptors will find it is in their own financial interests to partner, on some level, with some incumbents. That will be good for disruptors, and essential for incumbents.

Still, it's worth remembering that Verizon, at&t, Comcast and others are going to have to invest in their delivery platforms. Investors won't like it. But the investments ultimately will pay off if the incumbents can figure out ways to work with disruptors instead of trying to invent everything themselves. We think they know that too.

If contestants stop at "bundling" they all lose, ultimately. Growing new markets is key to winning over the long term, and we can't see this happening anyway other than working with disruptors. Otherwise a very expensive zero sum game is the logical outcome. And that's not good for users, in either professional, personal or other elements of life.