Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Exempting popular apps from data charges is anti-competitive

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 110 posts

Re: Exempting popular apps from data charges is anti-competitive

#21

Post by anindyabd »

hammock wrote: post #18
anindyabd wrote: post #3

I'm not sure how much competition Wikipedia has as a free online encyclopedia. Also, Wikipedia is a non-profit, and doesn't really make more money by having more people use the site. It's strange to claim that Wikipedia is being anti-competitive. Personally, I think Wikipedia Zero is a great program. The article also says: > The reason that the Chinese, Russian and Cuban governments fear an open Internet more than an…

The biggest competitors in a case like this you can't see, because they don't exist. It's all the competing products that were never created because the barriers to entry were too high.

> It's all the competing products that were never created because the barriers to entry were too high.

Are you claiming that they weren't created because of Wikipedia? If you do have evidence of that, then indeed Wikipedia was being anti-competitive. Otherwise, simply because no competition ever popped up, doesn't mean that it's Wikipedia's fault.

Re: Exempting popular apps from data charges is anti-competitive

#22

Post by Someone1234 »

phillc73 wrote: post #16
SixSigma wrote: post #2

My mobile contract in the UK is $20 per month for 1000Gb on 4G with tethering permitted, 5000 voice minutes to the same carrier, 2000 voice minutes to any other carrier and 5000 text messages. It is not just the Zero Rating that is evil.

Exactly. I thought this article dealed with a very specific problem in a very specific geographic region. I’m talking about the issue of “zero rating”: the practice being followed by mobile carriers around the world to provide Web access “for free” to their users to certain chosen services. But all other OECD countries have some flavor of zero rating in place. I've never heard of a UK or European carrier implementing…

> I've never heard of a UK or European carrier implementing "zero rating" services, so I'm now sure how far around the world this occurs and the only concrete examples given are in the US.

Historically it has happened in the UK. For example, "daily passes" of data coming with unlimited Facebook (on O2 PayG I believe) and some streaming music all over the place (Orange pre-EE, Virgin, et al).

I don't see anyone doing it currently as frankly data prices have become so inexpensive that it isn't as interesting of an offering. The UK is largely about price wars right now, who can offer the cheapest service. The gimmicks have mostly fallen by the wayside.

I'm talking back when 150 MB was a "lot" of data and 1 GB was over £35/month with a 12 month contract).

Re: Exempting popular apps from data charges is anti-competitive

#23

Post by sliverstorm »

mmebane wrote: post #19
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So don't. Facebook and Wikipedia don't require a huge amount of bandwidth, that's how they can be free. Just stop discriminating. Give people a mode they can switch on where they don't get charged for data but get capped at 0.5Mbps.

This is my preference. I think the only reason T-Mobile offers unlimited music streaming is that it typically consumes <= 256 kbps. I would much rather they offered an "economy mode" switch where I could throttle my entire device and browse whatever I wanted.

T-Mobile offers unlimited music streaming because it is marketable. They are a third-wheel carrier, so they are hustling hard in search of a way to differentiate themselves, and "Unlimited Music" is going to be a much more successful ad campaign than "Unlimited 256kbps Browsing"

FWIW I am a T-Mobile customer.

Re: Exempting popular apps from data charges is anti-competitive

#24

Post by jedbrown »

phillc73 wrote: post #16
SixSigma wrote: post #2

My mobile contract in the UK is $20 per month for 1000Gb on 4G with tethering permitted, 5000 voice minutes to the same carrier, 2000 voice minutes to any other carrier and 5000 text messages. It is not just the Zero Rating that is evil.

Exactly. I thought this article dealed with a very specific problem in a very specific geographic region. I’m talking about the issue of “zero rating”: the practice being followed by mobile carriers around the world to provide Web access “for free” to their users to certain chosen services. But all other OECD countries have some flavor of zero rating in place. I've never heard of a UK or European carrier implementing…

> It seems to me that the root of the problem is overpriced data, and not the "zero rating" of some services.

Zero rating facilitates overpriced data, which in turn incentivizes users to stay within the discount/zero web. Without zero rating, a broad consumer base will demand reasonable data rates, encouraging carriers to compete.

Re: Exempting popular apps from data charges is anti-competitive

#25

Post by phillc73 »

jedbrown wrote: post #24
phillc73 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. I thought this article dealed with a very specific problem in a very specific geographic region. I’m talking about the issue of “zero rating”: the practice being followed by mobile carriers around the world to provide Web access “for free” to their users to certain chosen services. But all other OECD countries have some flavor of zero rating in place. I've never heard of a UK or European carrier implementing…

> It seems to me that the root of the problem is overpriced data, and not the "zero rating" of some services. Zero rating facilitates overpriced data, which in turn incentivizes users to stay within the discount/zero web. Without zero rating, a broad consumer base will demand reasonable data rates, encouraging carriers to compete.

If this is the case, and as @Someone1234 recalls the UK used to have zero rating services (I honestly don't remember them), what changed in that landscape to bring data prices to significantly lower points? Surely not just competition on its own. The US mobile market isn't a monopoly (although I stand to be corrected if this is spoken in ignorance).

Re: Exempting popular apps from data charges is anti-competitive

#26

Post by frizzlebox »

Someone1234 wrote: post #13
spost wrote: post #8

The article calls out AT&T and Sprint for their programs, thought I'd mention that T-Mobile has something similar going on with their Music Freedom program: http://www.t-mobile.com/offer/free-music-streaming.html

I was going to point out the same. I really like T-Mobile's program since a lot of my data usage was disappearing into streaming music (namely Google Music/Play Music). However I will fully admit it is anti-competitive since if you're a new music streaming service just trying to make it, you won't get onto T-Mobile's free list (and even Google Music/Play Music wasn't until extremely recently, like even two months ago…

Adding to this, the T-Mobile FAQ claims they're willing to add legal services if you contact them:

http://www.t-mobile.com/offer/free-music-streaming.html

  Will you add more streaming providers over time?
  
  Absolutely!  Any lawful and licensed streaming music service can work with us for inclusion in this offer, which is designed to benefit all of our Simple Choice customers.  And we want to hear from you!  Who do you think we should add next?  Vote at #MusicFreedom and be heard!
   
  If you are a streaming service provider Click here, send us an email and we’ll get back to you to begin the process.
Doesn't make it any less anti-competitive, I think, but it feels nice to see this kind of promise.

Re: Exempting popular apps from data charges is anti-competitive

#27

Post by anindyabd »

kassemi wrote: post #12
anindyabd wrote: post #3

I'm not sure how much competition Wikipedia has as a free online encyclopedia. Also, Wikipedia is a non-profit, and doesn't really make more money by having more people use the site. It's strange to claim that Wikipedia is being anti-competitive. Personally, I think Wikipedia Zero is a great program. The article also says: > The reason that the Chinese, Russian and Cuban governments fear an open Internet more than an…

I'm not sure how much competition Wikipedia has as a free online encyclopedia. Any other encyclopedia and any wiki-formatted knowledge store could be considered close competition. Wikipedia's in the business of providing high-level (and often low) level information, and there are tons of players in that space - just perhaps not as generalized and overreaching. Wikipedia is a non-profit. They don't really make more mo…

> It's still in the best interest of Wikipedia to keep up traffic.

That interest is clearly not "making more money". Can you explicitly explain what those interests are? I may be naive in believing that Wikipedia's goal is "making all the world's information freely available to everyone". But if they have some other ulterior motive for expansion, I would like to know what that is.

Re: Exempting popular apps from data charges is anti-competitive

#29

Post by whyaduck »

frizzlebox wrote: post #26
Someone1234 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was going to point out the same. I really like T-Mobile's program since a lot of my data usage was disappearing into streaming music (namely Google Music/Play Music). However I will fully admit it is anti-competitive since if you're a new music streaming service just trying to make it, you won't get onto T-Mobile's free list (and even Google Music/Play Music wasn't until extremely recently, like even two months ago…

Adding to this, the T-Mobile FAQ claims they're willing to add legal services if you contact them: http://www.t-mobile.com/offer/free-music-streaming.html Will you add more streaming providers over time? Absolutely! Any lawful and licensed streaming music service can work with us for inclusion in this offer, which is designed to benefit all of our Simple Choice customers. And we want to hear from you! Who do you thin…

Yes, definitely anti-competitive (he says as he changes Spotify's streaming quality to "Extreme" on his T-Mobile serviced phone).

Re: Exempting popular apps from data charges is anti-competitive

#30

Post by crazypyro »

anindyabd wrote: post #27
kassemi wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how much competition Wikipedia has as a free online encyclopedia. Any other encyclopedia and any wiki-formatted knowledge store could be considered close competition. Wikipedia's in the business of providing high-level (and often low) level information, and there are tons of players in that space - just perhaps not as generalized and overreaching. Wikipedia is a non-profit. They don't really make more mo…

> It's still in the best interest of Wikipedia to keep up traffic. That interest is clearly not "making more money". Can you explicitly explain what those interests are? I may be naive in believing that Wikipedia's goal is "making all the world's information freely available to everyone". But if they have some other ulterior motive for expansion, I would like to know what that is.

At the very least, each of their employees' has a selfish reason to keep Wikipedia the de-facto encyclopedia. For instance, they have over $20 million in salary they need to pay every year and without traffic, they lose donations (over $45 million a year) and therefore could lose their jobs. Seems a monopoly would be in their interest.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/b/bf/Audit_...

Post reply on HN