roundtable: Re: feast-or-famine, FYI from Edupage

roundtable: Re: feast-or-famine, FYI from Edupage

Re: feast-or-famine, FYI from Edupage

Jeffrey S. Hops (jhops@alliancecm.org)
Sat, 2 Aug 1997 08:13:02 -0700 (PDT) 

Date: Sat, 2 Aug 1997 08:13:02 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970802110704.2a3f3858@pop.igc.org>
To: roundtable@cni.org
From: "Jeffrey S. Hops" <jhops@alliancecm.org>
Subject: Re: feast-or-famine, FYI from Edupage


On 8/1/97, Sam Simon <sam@simon.net> wrote:
>
>     You are right of course.  The point of usage charges is to (1)
> discourage use and (2) allocate cost to cost causers.  Cost in a network
> envrionment tends to be expansion to meet peak load demand.  Thus, it is
> important to charge only for those who contribute to peak, when they
> contribute to peak.  Sometimes, the cost of metering in this way is more
> expensive than the value it creates.  In any case, if there is to be
> unit charging, it should be focused on peak-load times.

I second Jamie.  Let's also remember that fees imposed to limit demand 
generally create a windfall for the entity receiving the revenue (a 
windfall that increases with congestion -- creating a perverse incentive 
to _limit_ supply). Does the edupage clip say who would be the recipient 
of this windfall -- particularly if the charge needed to control traffic 
is well in excess of actual cost?  I can think of a number of public 
nonprofit institutions who could use the money more than Bell Atlantic 
or AOL.  How about directing all usage control proceeds to the Universal 
Service school and Libary fund?

Jeffrey Hops
Director, Government Relations
Alliance for Community Media
voice (202) 393-2650 x14
fax   (202) 393-2653
<jhops@alliancecm.org>

[CNI Home Page]