Qwest issued its Q1 earnings report this morning (more later), but during the company’s earnings call, Chairman/CEO Dick Notebaert sounded defiant and decisive in his statements that Qwest has every intention of charging third-party providers for improved delivery to Qwest’s broadband subscribers.
Notebaert said that Qwest is pursuing “value creation” opportunities, one of which is charging third-party content and applications providers fees for improved delivery to end-users.
Let me say very clearly: Qwest supports net neutrality and we have done so from the very minute the FCC policy statement was issued last August 5. Kevin Martin stated those principles and we support him. That policy was meant to ensure that there is no impediment to anyone’s ability to fully utilize the net. It does not mean, it does not mean and was never intended to mean that we cannot provide our customers with differentiated services that enhance their position in their markets.
Notebaert made clear that Qwest intends to charge content providers for “the opportunity to enhance” those providers’ customer experience. He emphasized that Qwest will be paid for this service.
Our goal is to offer customers including content providers the opportunity to enhanced their customer experience and provide faster delivery for their products. And we will be paid accordingly for this product segmentation opportunity.
Notebaert ended his firebrand-ish interlude with this final comment: “For this industry to grow, we must leverage opportunities, which the Internet clearly is.”
You know, I wonder if the phone companies are even the least bit aware that people — including many Senators and Members of Congress, not to mention investors — are getting nervous about these ballsy statements (where are their PR people? their lobbyists?). The cable guys have done it right — cable execs have steadfastly stayed muted when it comes to the topic of network neutrality.
Cynthia Brumfield at 5:33 PM|Comments(8)
Isn't this exactly what everyone has been saying all along? Differentiated service is not a violation of net neutrality. I say bravo to Qwest for a good business strategy.
Posted by: AJ Carey at May 10, 2006 3:38 PM
So the Put Bureaucrats in Charge of the Internet campaign isn't going to fly here? ;)
Posted by: hack at May 9, 2006 2:11 PM
It seems to me the keyword here is "enhanced". Qwest states that they intend to charge for improved access to bandwidth, not penalize companies who refuse to pay up. And if any of them do cross the line and actually hinder a consumer's ability to use the Internet, it won't take long for the market to squeeze them out. Consumers will not stand by a faulty product for long.
Posted by: jeran at May 8, 2006 10:15 PM
Hack and Jawaid both make great points. It seems to me that both sides of this debate tend to talk past each other, and it's much more about expanding capabilities than interfering with the Internet as we know it. In any case, this is a dispute that can be resolved on the level of business. There's no need for government to come in and screw things up.
Posted by: Paulaner01 at May 8, 2006 7:02 PM
"Enhanced" means QoS - Quality of Service.
QoS refers to technology that (for example) ensures that VoIP packets get priority over all other packets - ensuring a land-line style quality level for VoIP.
QoS is also needed for proper delivery of streaming video over the Internet.
There is absolutely no reason Qwest should not be able to charge others to have their traffic given this kind of priority.
This is NOT about blocking some web sites and allowing others through. The current Internet is "best-effort". Your packets may get through, may not, depending on how busy any given point in the network is. QoS ("improved delivery") enables a new level of quality for certain Internet applications.
Posted by: Jawaid Bazyar at May 5, 2006 9:33 PM
It seems to me that this is not a fight between the evil telcos and the little guy, more like a schoolyard squabble between the telcos and the software giants--Microsoft, Google, Amazon etc. And let's face it, the giants have the financial and market strength to stand up to unreasonable demands of the telcos. I think it's fair for Qwest to want to maximize thier profits and I think it's equally as fair for Google to say "hell no" if Qwest demands outrageous payment for the priviledge of being carried on thier pipes. At the end of the day, Qwest needs Google as much as Google needs Qwest...so let's let the market hash this out as opposed to inserting burndensome big government regulations into the internet.
Posted by: hack at May 5, 2006 7:11 AM
Yeah, the cable companies have played this right, by working with governmental official to preserve thier monopoly. Is this what supporters of net neutrality are advocating? I prefer for telcos to have the opportunity to make a profit than to have the government regulating my Internet experience.
Posted by: lessgov at May 5, 2006 1:32 AM
You never hear the bullet that gets you. The telco's are way overconfident and fail to see the revolution that is all around them.
Posted by: Mike Bookey at May 3, 2006 8:21 PM
Blogs We Read
