Not that I think this is a decisive argument in a policy context, but as people think about the broadband and cable market, I think a useful piece of background factual information is that major cable companies are paying large and growing dividends:
So good for those companies and good for their shareholders. But some folks are out there online painting a portrait of broadband as an industry that's in critical need of expensive new investment and badly at risk of inability to finance that new investment. What we see here is the opposite.
It's not that cable companies are furiously seeking to invest but are held back by a lack of funds. Rather, cable companies' level of investment is held back by a fundamental lack of competition. On the one hand, Time Warner feels sufficiently unthreatened by new entrants that it prefers raising its dividends to increasing the level of investment in its existing service area. On the other hand, Time Warner feels sufficiently bleak about the prospects for competing with other incumbents that it prefers raising its dividends to investing in breaking into new service areas.
TODAY IN SLATE
The World’s Politest Protesters
The Occupy Central demonstrators are courteous. That’s actually what makes them so dangerous.
The Religious Right Is Not Happy With Republicans
How Did the Royals Win Despite Bunting So Many Times? Bunting Is a Terrible Strategy.
Federal Law Enforcement Has Declared War on Encryption
Justice and the FBI really do not like Apple’s and Google’s new privacy measures.
Homeland Is Good Again! For Now.
How Even an Old Hipster Can Age Gracefully
On their new albums, Leonard Cohen, Robert Plant, and Loudon Wainwright III show three ways.