Broadband Openness Rules Are Fully Justified by Economic Research
AbstractThis paper responds to arguments made in filings in the FCC’s broadband openness proceeding (GN Dkt. 09-191) and incorporates data made available since my January 14th filing in that proceeding. Newly available data confirm that there is limited competition in the broadband access marketplace. Contrary to some others’ arguments, wireless broadband access services are unlikely to act as effective economic substitutes for wireline broadband access services (whether offered by telephone companies or cable operators) and instead are likely to act as a complement. Nor will competition in the Internet backbone marketplace constrain broadband providers’ behavior in providing “last mile” broadband access services. The last mile, concentrated market structure, combined with high switching costs, provides last mile broadband network providers with the ability to engage in practices that will reduce social welfare in the absence of open broadband rules. Furthermore, the effect of open broadband rules on broadband provider revenues is likely to be small and can be either positive or negative. Unfortunately, various filings have misstated or mischaracterized the results on the economics of two-sided markets. Contrary to what some have argued, allowing broadband providers to charge third party content providers will not necessarily result in lower prices being charged to residential Internet subscribers. This is true under a robust set of assumptions. Despite some parties’ mischaracterization of the economic literature, price discrimination by broadband providers against third party applications and content providers will reduce societal welfare for numerous reasons. This reduction in societal welfare is especially acute when price discrimination is taken to the extreme of exclusive dealing between broadband providers and content providers. Antitrust and consumer protection laws are insufficient to protect societal welfare in the absence of open broadband rules.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by NET Institute in its series Working Papers with number 10-02.
Length: 34 pages
Date of creation: Apr 2010
Date of revision: Apr 2010
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.NETinst.org/
Network Neutrality; Internet; Discrimination; Prioritization; Two-Sided Market; Market Power; Termination Fee; Broadband;
Other versions of this item:
- Nicholas ECONOMIDES, 2011. "Broadband Openness Rules Are Fully Justified by Economic Research," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(84), pages 127-151, 4th quart.
- L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance
- D4 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure and Pricing
- L12 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Monopoly; Monopolization Strategies
- L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
- C63 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computational Techniques
- D42 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure and Pricing - - - Monopoly
- D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure and Pricing - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2010-07-03 (All new papers)
- NEP-COM-2010-07-03 (Industrial Competition)
- NEP-ICT-2010-07-03 (Information & Communication Technologies)
- NEP-IND-2010-07-03 (Industrial Organization)
- NEP-MIC-2010-07-03 (Microeconomics)
- NEP-NET-2010-07-03 (Network Economics)
- NEP-REG-2010-07-03 (Regulation)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Ilya Segal & Michael D. Whinston, 2000. "Exclusive Contracts and Protection of Investments," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(4), pages 603-633, Winter.
- Krattenmaker, Thomas G & Salop, Steven C, 1986. "Competition and Cooperation in the Market for Exclusionary Rights," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(2), pages 109-13, May.
- Schwartz, Marius, 1990. "Third-Degree Price Discrimination and Output: Generalizing a Welfare Result," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1259-62, December.
- B. Douglas Bernheim & Michael D. Whinston, 1997.
"Incomplete Contracts and Strategic Ambiguity,"
Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers
1787, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Hermalin, Benjamin E & Katz, Michael L, 2006.
"The Economics of Product-Line Restrictions With an Application to the Network Neutrality Debate,"
Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series
qt81r3b7xs, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Hermalin, Benjamin E. & Katz, Michael L., 2007. "The economics of product-line restrictions with an application to the network neutrality debate," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 215-248, June.
- Mark Armstrong, 2005.
"Competition in Two-Sided Markets,"
- repec:reg:wpaper:541 is not listed on IDEAS
- Bresnahan, T.F & Reiss, P.C., 1989.
"Entry And Competition In Concentrated Markets,"
151, Stanford - Studies in Industry Economics.
- Robin S. Lee & Tim Wu, 2009. "Subsidizing Creativity through Network Design: Zero-Pricing and Net Neutrality," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 23(3), pages 61-76, Summer.
- Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, December.
- Bester, Helmut & Petrakis, Emmanuel, 1996.
"Coupons and oligopolistic price discrimination,"
International Journal of Industrial Organization,
Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 227-242.
- Aghion, Philippe & Bolton, Patrick, 1987. "Contracts as a Barrier to Entry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(3), pages 388-401, June.
- Jay Pil Choi & Byung-Cheol Kim, 2010.
"Net neutrality and investment incentives,"
RAND Journal of Economics,
RAND Corporation, vol. 41(3), pages 446-471.
- Nicholas Economides & Lawrence J. White, 1995.
"Access and Interconnection Pricing: How Efficient is the Efficient Component Pricing Rule?,"
95-04, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
- Nicholas Economides & Lawrence J. White, 1997. "Access and Interconnection Pricing: How Efficient is the Efficient Component Pricing Rule?," Industrial Organization 9701003, EconWPA.
- repec:rje:randje:v:37:y:2006:3:p:645-667 is not listed on IDEAS
- Shane Greenstein & Ryan C. McDevitt, 2009. "The Broadband Bonus: Accounting for Broadband Internet's Impact on U.S. GDP," NBER Working Papers 14758, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Salop, Steven C & Scheffman, David T, 1983. "Raising Rivals' Costs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(2), pages 267-71, May.
- Paul Klemperer, 1987. "The Competitiveness of Markets with Switching Costs," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(1), pages 138-150, Spring.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Nicholas Economides).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.