Eliminating net neutrality incentivizes ISPs to build auxiliary services that they can artificially support by throttling the bandwidth of competing products. It incentivizes them to seek profit by favoring some net traffic over other net traffic.
It does not in any way incentivize them to build larger or better networks. It does not incentivize them to invest in their infrastructure. All it does is let them make more profit off what they already have.
I mean seriously, if the whole argument is that they're not making enough money as it is: if a 97%[1] profit margin isn't enough money for them to build out their networks, just how much more do they need?
It does not in any way incentivize them to build larger or better networks. It does not incentivize them to invest in their infrastructure. All it does is let them make more profit off what they already have.
I mean seriously, if the whole argument is that they're not making enough money as it is: if a 97%[1] profit margin isn't enough money for them to build out their networks, just how much more do they need?
[1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/time-warner-cab...