Bells need to Pay Google

DSL is only valuable if people can do something with the connection. The Bells & Cablecos pay HBO to carry their content, why should it be the reverse on the web? Maybe Google should collect $2.25 per DSL subscriber just like ESPN does.

In fact, as he points out, that's exactly how it works in the video business. Verizon just worked out a deal whereby they're paying CBS to be able to carry CBS on their new IPTV offering. It's hard to see how Verizon can argue that it makes sense for them to pay CBS, but that Google should pay them. In both cases, it's about adding content or services to the same network to make it valuable enough for consumers to sign up. Evslin points out (as we have in the past as well) that none of this is an issue if there's real competition. The fact that we're seeing these threats (even if the telcos are trying to backtrack a little) suggests that the telcos don't see themselves in a competitive market when it comes to internet connectivity.

In fact, the one thing that ISP Marketing misses out on is not the price but the value of an end-to-end experience plus the many ways that the hand-holding makes the internet experience so much better.