Delivering super-fast broadband in the UK - Interactive Executive Summary

« Paragraph 1.38 | Read the full summary | Paragraph 1.36 »

1.37

The third incentive for launching super-fast broadband services is to generate new revenues. This may be even more important now than it was for current broadband services given the larger cost of investment in new access networks. New revenues could come from new applications and services, consumers being willing to pay more for access, or new commercial models.

Policy can help create an environment in which new commercial models can flourish

Comments

Human rights on 23 September 2008 at 1:08pm

It is obvious that improving broadband infrastructure requires serious investment.

This extra revenue should either come from government subsidies (already been denied), through private sector investment or the ISP's should simply increase their access charges.

What should NOT happen is customers' online privacy being compromised to achieve these additional sources of revenue.

With regard to new commercial models, there is a lot to be said about targeted behavioural advertising as a source of revenue.

Such technology, which involves interception of communication between user and websites, should not be forced onto those who do not want it either by mis-informing the intention of such services, or by 'tweaking' the regulations to fit the product.

There is EU legislation in place to cover such types of technology for a reason. Such technology should not be deployed without the full and explicit consent of all parties in a communication.

If new commercial models wish to flourish then they should operate within EU legislation and conform to the UK laws that enforce them.

JohnK on 23 September 2008 at 6:16pm

I would hope that some means of preventing the pursuit of profit for profit's sake and at the expense of, say, personal privacy, is made impossible.

All aspects associated with the invasion of personal privacy should be discouraged or, at worst, be subject to individual opt-in, certainly not opt-out.

Remember, there may be more than one user of an Internet access point

Lindsey Annison on 24 September 2008 at 4:29am

There is more than enough evidence coming from the US and elsewhere that the deployment of FTTH can substantially reduce opex costs. That should be sufficient to counter any need for "new revenue" for any telco.

FTTH (not FTTC) uses considerably less power, thereby saving the telcos a fortune, let alone improving their carbon footprint. FTTH Council have produced a comprehensive report on this.

The telcos cannot have it all ways to the detriment of the consumers, as they (mainly) have to date.

Ofcom has a statutory duty to protect consumers' interests, and no statutory duty whatsoever to protect telcos' revenue streams.

mike kiely on 24 September 2008 at 1:09pm

Public poicy and goal setting is crucial to driving investment.

Reducing road congestion and airport congestion through improved home connectivity needs to be developed into a set of incentives.

The delivery of care and health through better connectivity needs specific policy initiatives.

It would help if Broadband Connectivity was declared as important as the phone network in the last century. It also needs to lose its best efforts tag.

Barbara Moore on 24 September 2008 at 2:41pm

Forgive me for being confused here.

New revenues = charging more than was previously charged

New services = why should one service be bundled with another?

As soon as the supplier of the network starts adding other services there is a conflict of interest. Are they an independent conduit for transmitting data or are they using the conduit to transmit their own data; charging consumers twice, once for the conduit and again for services. Will preference be given for secondary services over primary services thereby making it more difficult for other businesses to enter into the same market.

There are a lot of e-commerce businesses out there who are already providing many of these added services. These services should remain outside the control and influence of the networks. This will give competition an equal opportunity both from a cost and a marketing perspective. Revenue earned from supplying bandwidth to external businesses is what should be funding the upgrading of the networks.

Capital expenditure should not be split between networks and added services.

The comments to this entry are closed.

About this Site

This consultation has been running from 23 September to 2 December 2008 and it is now closed.
You can continue to follow the debate on the Superfast broadband blog.

Related Links