[Discuss] Competition of broadband

[Edward Ned Harvey]

> From: Ben Eisenbraun [mailto:bene at klatsch.org]
> 
> The only reason network providers build network to unprofitable areas,
i.e.
> low-density, rural areas, is because regulations force them to. It has
> absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with how much they are charging the
> high-density, profitable areas.

Agreed, but, if the business is more profitable across all types of users
and areas, then there are more profitable regions and the unprofitable areas
are smaller.  So it makes financial sense to expand more into those areas
that otherwise would have been unprofitable.  

So, can you enforce LLU only in the profitable areas, and not in the more
rural areas?  Of course there's nothing theoretically preventing the rules
from being written that way, but it would be interesting to see the state
legislature pass a rule saying that Arlington residents follow this rule,
while Lincoln residents have a different one.  Certainly not impossible -
and could be handled by more localized legislation or zoning etc etc.

Amongst the arguments against net neutrality, in favor of deregulation, is
that when you allow the ISP's to be more profitable, they expand more.  They
provide more services to more people.

Can you enforce net neutrality only in the city, and don't give it to the
country folk?