7 April 2014
If you paid the same as somebody else for a slice of the same cake, but theirs was twice the size of yours, I think it’s fair to say you’d feel a little put out (unless you were on a diet). Surely, if they’re getting more of that product than you, then they should pay for the extra, right? Apparently not, if what you’re paying for is bandwidth.
As you might have guessed, I’ve been looking over the recent coverage of the net neutrality law that has been adopted by the European Parliament, to stop ISPs from charging extra to companies using up more bandwidth. Personally, I think the fact that a government or organisation can force businesses not to charge more for this is preposterous. It’s just a billing model. And someone somewhere has to pay for the switches and routers, and to dig up the road!
I’m all for an open, accessible internet, but upgrading infrastructure is expensive and with the increased need for bandwidth, ISPs are having to invest heavily and pay more to do so. Is it not logical that the people who use the network the most should be paying the most?
At UKFast, we don’t charge for bandwidth. I mean, we have an acceptable usage policy, but feel we have a business model that provides services that more or less cover the traffic these bigger companies would have. As a result, we’ve got lots of high bandwidth customers using us. However, just because this is our model, doesn’t mean that it should be the same for everyone.
At the end of the day, we live in a world where we have the freedom to charge what we want and, likewise, to choose which provider we want. If the ISPs can’t charge for bandwidth, they will bill people more for something else.
The statement released by a group of telecommunications trade associations described the new amendments as restrictive and anti-consumer choice. What do you think?