I'm in Australia, where we have usage based billing, and I agree with this analysis.
Here, the key to making it work has been competition at the ISP level. I think regulators are better off chasing anti-competitive practices than trying to outlaw business models.
For example, in Australia the incumbent telco has been forced to give access to its copper-based network, and to its exchanges. That has allowed ISPs to install their own equipment (which is how ADSL2 rolled out here), which brought speed & price competition.
(Yes, Australia has a lot of problems with domestic internet policy wrt Telstra. This policy had fairly good outcomes though - if a little slower than could have been ideal)
Agreed. Here in New Zealand, we've learned to deal with it. You can either pay around $1 per GB if you go over, or get throttled to 64k or similar.
It's like driving your car, you only have so much petrol, and if that runs out you need to put more in, so you use it wisely. (i.e. you drive when you need to)
Cost isn't cost to transfer the next GB though, it's the cost to build an infrastructure that can provide decent QoS to all the Netflix users. It's a much different equation.
Here, the key to making it work has been competition at the ISP level. I think regulators are better off chasing anti-competitive practices than trying to outlaw business models.
For example, in Australia the incumbent telco has been forced to give access to its copper-based network, and to its exchanges. That has allowed ISPs to install their own equipment (which is how ADSL2 rolled out here), which brought speed & price competition.
(Yes, Australia has a lot of problems with domestic internet policy wrt Telstra. This policy had fairly good outcomes though - if a little slower than could have been ideal)