Wireless is only nominally under Title II. Section 332 of the statute instructs the FCC to forbear on most of the parts of Title II when it comes to wireless.
And Title II is one reason there is competition in wireless, but you've got the effect backwards. Sprint, AT&T, and Verizon are not cable providers, so their wired networks were heavily regulated by full-on Title II. They invested money in wireless because it was much less regulated. But the big thing was that bandwidth demand for mobile exploded, while growing much slower for wired.
Agreed. Wireless was a blue ocean just like cable/broadband was in the late 90s/early 00s where mobile really hit in the last decade. So of course most of the money and investment would go there, but being under Title II somewhat helped rather than, like in wired, a full on monopoly over areas creating stagnation and less demand. They are still competing it out for your business over wired even though Google Fiber may be in even higher demand.
However, part of the promise of getting $200B in investment/breaks was to finish building out the wired side, which really has not been done and is now harming us competitively with the world. Part of their promise was to spend it on the less demand areas of wired. Had they built out fiber and competed there would be more demand for it. Google Fiber is in high demand and all Google is doing is using broadband late 90s playbook, just give the people faster speeds and whole unrealized economies emerge that our GDP has been missing for a decade during wireless laser focus.
Comments
Wireless is only nominally under Title II. Section 332 of the statute instructs the FCC to forbear on most of the parts of Title II when it comes to wireless.
And Title II is one reason there is competition in wireless, but you've got the effect backwards. Sprint, AT&T, and Verizon are not cable providers, so their wired networks were heavily regulated by full-on Title II. They invested money in wireless because it was much less regulated. But the big thing was that bandwidth demand for mobile exploded, while growing much slower for wired.
Agreed. Wireless was a blue ocean just like cable/broadband was in the late 90s/early 00s where mobile really hit in the last decade. So of course most of the money and investment would go there, but being under Title II somewhat helped rather than, like in wired, a full on monopoly over areas creating stagnation and less demand. They are still competing it out for your business over wired even though Google Fiber may be in even higher demand.
However, part of the promise of getting $200B in investment/breaks was to finish building out the wired side, which really has not been done and is now harming us competitively with the world. Part of their promise was to spend it on the less demand areas of wired. Had they built out fiber and competed there would be more demand for it. Google Fiber is in high demand and all Google is doing is using broadband late 90s playbook, just give the people faster speeds and whole unrealized economies emerge that our GDP has been missing for a decade during wireless laser focus.