Wednesday, February 6, 2008

Verizon, at&t Take Different Approaches to Bandwidth Caps

For an industry that in decades past has tended to move in lockstep, it is refreshing to see an ever-increasing divergence in strategies and marketing positions. Consider the matter of bandwidth caps and content filtering.

at&t has decided to filter non-authorized content on its broadband access networks. The move is an attempt to reduce the peer-to-peer bandwidth load on its networks.

Verizon, on the other hand, doesn't want to do so and says it will not. Many policy advocates will cheer that stance.

One might credit Verizon's decision to move to a fiber-to-home network for that laudable move. Simply, Verizon has a lot more headroom than at&t will to support today's heavy users, and ultimately, heavier use by nearly all users as more video moves to Internet delivery.

Beyond the policy stance differences, and the customer goodwill Verizon will garner, the notable difference stems from fundamental decisions each carrier has made. Verizon made a risky bet in the face of nearly-universal investor opposition. at&t took a less-risky path that was rewarded by investors.

But each of those decisions now has repercussions in other areas where technology now conditions the marketing decisions each company can make. I've said it before and will say it again: Verizon did the right thing sticking to its FiOS program, in the face of intense financial community pressure.

In the years to come, that technology and financial decision is going to give Verizon many options other contestants may not have.

No comments:

Will AI Actually Boost Productivity and Consumer Demand? Maybe Not

A recent report by PwC suggests artificial intelligence will generate $15.7 trillion in economic impact to 2030. Most of us, reading, seein...