Feds Slowed DSL by Forcing “Open Access”

Here is the background.  From the earliest days of broadband service, controversy raged over whether the physical networks used to transport data should be allowed to control content.  Thus open access rules, which forced telcos to allow broadband company rivals to use their networks at regulated rates.  Cable TV systems, meanwhile, also provided Internet connections via cable modems, but without any obligation to share their facilities.  If an independent Internet Service Provider (ISP) like Covad or Earthlink wanted to connect customers via Comcast’s lines, they could negotiate a deal but had no legal club — as they did under open access.

There was a vigorous campaign to mandate open access on cable similar to DSL; regulators under both Presidents Clinton and Bush refused.  The inevitable litigation ensued; but the Supreme Court set the matter to rest in FCC v. Brand X (2005).  Its 6-3 decision upheld the FCC’s classification of cable broadband as an "information service," placing it beyond the scope of common carrier regulation.

For a number of years, therefore, DSL service was subject to open access while cable was not.  Unsurprisingly, DSL providers were blown away early in the race for market share.  By the end of 2002, cable-modem subscribers numbered 11 million and DSL just 6.1 million, according to Leichtman Research.

Then DSL began its deregulatory trek.  The first critical reform was a surprise FCC decision in February 2003 to end "line sharing" rules.  This dramatically raised the prices which ISPs would have to pay to use phone company facilities to provide retail DSL service, dealing a severe blow to companies like Covad.  Echoing conventional wisdom, the New York Times news story forecast a consumer defeat: "High-Speed Service May Cost More."

It hasn’t.  Average DSL rates, according to Kagan Research, dropped from $39.51 per month in 2002 to $34.72 in 2003.  Telcos also expanded the scope, capacity and quality of advanced networks, even improving its endemic customer relations problems.

Consumers responded.  DSL, holding just 35% market share in 2002, pulled even with cable among new subscribers in 2004.  Leichtman Research reports that "DSL providers have added more broadband subscribers than cable providers in each of the last six quarters," and that overall, "the first quarter of 2006 was the best ever for both DSL and cable broadband providers."  Unleashed from open access, DSL is attracting customers like never before — and the overall growth of broadband subscribers (DSL and cable) is notably higher.

 

For the full commentary, see:

THOMAS W. HAZLETT.  "RULE OF LAW; Broadbandits."  Wall Street Journal  (Sat., August 12, 2006):  A9.

Chinese Learn “a Way of Life” from U.S. TV Shows

  Shanghai friends watch downloaded, subtitled, episode of "Friends."  Source of photo:  online version of the NYT article cited below.

 

SHANGHAI, Aug. 8 — For the past year and a half, said Ding Chengtai, a recent university graduate, friends have wondered why he seems to have disappeared.

Mr. Ding, 23, an Internet technology expert for a large Chinese bank, chuckled at the thought.  He has kept himself in virtual seclusion during his off hours, consumed with American television programs like “Lost,” “C.S.I.” and “Close to Home.”

He is no ordinary fan, though; none of the shows he watches can be seen on Chinese television.  Instead, he spends night after night creating Chinese subtitles for American sitcoms and dramas for a mushrooming audience of Chinese viewers who download them from the Internet free through services like BitTorrent.

. . .

To a person, the adapters say they are willing to devote long hours to this effort out of a love for American popular culture.  Many, including Mr. Ding, say they learned English by obsessively watching American movies and television programs.

Others say they pick up useful knowledge about everything from changing fashion and mores to medical science.

“It provides cultural background relating to every aspect of our lives:  politics,  history and human culture,” Mr. Ding said.  “These are the things that make American TV special.  When I first started watching ‘Friends,’ I found the show was full of information about American history and showed how America had rapidly developed.  It’s more interesting than textbooks or other ways of learning.”

On an Internet forum about the downloaded television shows, a poster who used the name Plum Blossom put it another way.

“After watching these shows for some time, I felt the attitudes of some of the characters were beginning to influence me,” the poster wrote.  “It’s hard to describe,  but I think I learned a way of life from some of them.  They are good at simplifying complex problems, which I think has something to do with American culture.”

 

For the full story, see: 

HOWARD W. FRENCH.  "Chinese Tech Buffs Slake Thirst for U.S. TV Shows."  The New York Times  (Weds., August 9, 2006):   A6.

 

“If Ethanol Made Economic Sense, It Wouldn’t Need a Subsidy”

 

  Source of graphics:  online version of the World-Herald article cited below.

 

(p. 1D)  LINCOLN – David Pimentel, a Cornell University researcher, has been criticized repeatedly since he questioned the energy value of ethanol in 1980.

In a government-funded report, he suggested that ethanol provides less energy than is used to produce it.  Even though that report has been disputed and rejected by other analysts, Pimentel has not backed down.

He said last week that rural developers, farmers and investors will rue the day they put their money, hopes and dreams into the corn-based alternative fuel.

"It is too bad," he said in an interview, "because it would be a tremendous asset to agriculture if this were a true winner."

Pimentel is among the public critics who raise red flags as momentum gathers for dramatic increases in production, especially in the nation’s top two ethanol-producing states:  Iowa and Nebraska.

While Pimentel is perhaps the expert most often quoted – in part because he presented his analysis more than 25 years ago – others also raise questions about the energy value of ethanol and its economic benefits and environmental effects.

Ethanol backers defend the fuel as a viable way to help stabilize the nation’s fuel supply.  But they haven’t convinced Jerry Taylor, an energy policy specialist for the Cato Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington, D.C.

"If ethanol made economic sense, it wouldn’t need a subsidy," Taylor said.

 

For the full story, see:

BILL HORD.  "High-octane Clash."  Omaha World-Herald  (Sunday, August 6, 2006):  1D-2D.

 

  Source of graphics:  online version of the World-Herald article cited above.

 

Entrepreneur’s $100 Million Rocket Destroyed

Lesson one:  entreprepreneurship is risky, and often fails.  Lesson two:  when an entreprepreneur’s rocket is destroyed, his $100 million goes up in smoke; when NASA’s rocket is destroyed, your $100 million goes up in smoke. 

Government and industry efforts to develop innovative, less costly rockets suffered a high-profile setback Friday, when the initial flight of a satellite launcher bankrolled by outspoken entrepreneur Elon Musk ended in failure.

After Mr. Musk spent nearly four years and well over $100 million of his personal fortune to create a rocket company from scratch, his Falcon project became the best-known and most aggressive entrant in the fledgling small-rocket segment.  But according to preliminary assessments, a fuel leak and resulting fire during last week’s inaugural launch shut down the main engines less than 30 seconds after blastoff from a Pacific atoll.  The rocket and a research satellite built by Air Force Academy students were destroyed.

 

For the full story, see:

Pasztor, Andy.  "Entrepreneur’s Rocket Suffers Setback During Maiden Launch."  Wall Street Journal (Monday, March 27, 2006):  A14.

Internet Reduces Elite Universities’ Competitive Edge

With professors spending so much time blogging for no payment, universities might wonder whether this detracts from their value.  Although there is no evidence of a direct link between blogging and publishing productivity, a new study* by E. Han Kim and Adair Morse, of the University of Michigan, and Luigi Zingales, of the University of Chicago, shows that the internet’s ability to spread knowledge beyond university classrooms has diminished the competitive edge that elite schools once held.

Top universities once benefited from having clusters of star professors.  The study showed that during the 1970s, an economics professor from a random university, outside the top 25 programmes, would double his research productivity by moving to Harvard.  The strong relationship between individual output and that of one’s colleagues weakened in the 1980s, and vanished by the end of the 1990s.

The faster flow of information and the waning importance of location—which blogs exemplify—have made it easier for economists from any university to have access to the best brains in their field.  That anyone with an internet connection can sit in on a virtual lecture from Mr DeLong means that his ideas move freely beyond the boundaries of Berkeley, creating a welfare gain for professors and the public.  

For the full story, see:

"FINANCE & ECONOMICS: Economists’ blogs; The invisible hand on the keyboard; Why do economists spend valuable time blogging?"  The Economist 380, no. 8489 (Aug. 3, 2006):  67. 

 

The full reference to the paper by Kim et al, is:

* “Are Elite Universities Losing Their Competitive Edge?” by E. Han Kim, Adair Morse and Luigi Zingales. NBER working paper 12245, May 2006.

(Thanks to Carolyn Diamond for giving me a copy of the article from The Economist.) 

 

Distorted Incentives in Medicine


  Source of book image:  http://www.harpercollins.com/books/9780061130298/The_End_of_Medicine/index.aspx

 

The problem right now, as Mr. Kessler sees it, is that we fight the "big three" — cancer, stroke and heart attack — with treatment rather than early detection.  Cancer cells and blood-vessel plaque can be handled much more easily in the early stages, but we spend most of our money on the later ones.  More than 80% of health-care dollars are paid by insurance companies and the government, and neither is especially interested in detecting disease when it first appears.  Doctors, regulators, researchers and payers of all kinds are locked into what Mr. Kessler calls — a bit ungenerously — the "cholesterol and cancer conspiracies."

A complicated system of mutual dependency distorts the incentives.  "The FDA is like the FCC and Big Pharma is like the regional Bells" is what Mr. Kessler hears from Don Listwin, a former Cisco executive who now heads the Canary Foundation, a Silicon Valley-based effort to promote preventive medicine.  In other words, in medicine as in telecom, the big players end up exploiting regulations more than opposing them, if only to preserve their monopolies.  The Food and Drug Administration — understandably but narrow-mindedly — wants "cures" for cancer and other diseases.  Thus tens of thousands of chemicals are screened, only a handful make it even to Phase I trials, and by the time a new drug is approved a billion dollars has been spent.  Even then the new drug may help only 10% of patients.

Yet if someone were to invent a device with a wide, preventive usefulness — say, a nanotech implant that would spot the proteins that indicate the first minute presence of cancer — it would have to go through the same process of billion-dollar testing.  Since the government and insurance companies are reluctant to add anything to their repertoire of coverage — and since such a device would be targeted at the much broader pool of people who are not sick — research might well stall in its earliest phases for lack of reimbursement-funding.

 

For the full review, see:

WILLIAM TUCKER.  "Bookshelf; The Art of Navigating Arteries."  Wall Street Journal (Tues., July 18, 2006):  D6.

 

A full reference to the book reviewed, is:

Kessler, Andy.  The End of Medicine:  How Silicon Valley (and Naked Mice) Will Reboot Your Doctor. HarperCollins, 2006.

 

Canon Prospers By Ignoring the ‘First Mover Advantage’

CanonHV10.jpg  Canon’s new HV10 high definition camcorder.  Source of image:  the NYT article cited below.

 

In the dot-com era, many believed that in each niche, the future belonged to the company that got-in, and got-big, first.  Sometimes this was called the ‘first mover advantage.’  There are many counter-examples.  Here is one more:

(p. C1)  Next month, Canon will release the world’s smallest and least expensive high-definition tape camcorder, a one-handable beauty called the HV10.

. . .

This image-quality business, as it turns out, is the new Canon’s specialty.  Talk about being blown away the first time you play back your recordings — let’s hope you have a sturdy couch.

Several advances are responsible for the brilliant picture quality.  First, Canon has paid extra attention to two of the most important aspects of HD recording:  focus and stability.  Because the high-def picture is so sharp and so wide, moments of blur-(p. C11)riness or hand-held jitters are far more noticeable and disturbing than in regular video.

So the front of the HV10 bears a special external sensor that, when you change your aim, handles the bulk of the refocusing extremely rapidly.  A standard through-the-lens focusing system does the fine tuning after that.  Together, these two mechanisms nearly eliminate the awkward moment of blurry focus-hunting that mars other camcorders’ output.

. . .

. . . , by entering the high-def camcorder market a year and a half after its rivals, Canon has played the same conservative waiting game it once used with digital cameras and camcorders.  Its goal, of course, is to watch and learn as the pioneers get all the arrows in their backs.

If the HV10 is any indication, the company is off to a very good start.

 

For the full review, see:

DAVID POGUE.  "A Head Start On the Future Of High-Def."  The New York Times  (Thurs., August 10, 2006):  C1 & C11.

 

“Financial Incentives Can Change the Way Medicine is Practiced”


        An angioplasty being performed in Eyria, Ohio.  Source of photo:  online version of the NYT article cited below.

 

Medicare patients in Elyria receive angioplasties at a rate nearly four times the national average . . .

. . .

. . . some outside experts say they are concerned that Elyria is an example, albeit an extreme one, of how medical decisions in this country can be influenced by financial incentives and professional training more than by solid evidence of what works best for a particular patient.

“People are rewarded for erring on the side of an aggressive, highly expensive intervention,” said Dr. Elliott S. Fisher, a researcher at Dartmouth Medical School, which analyzed Medicare data and found Elyria to be an outlier.

Medicare pays Elyria’s community hospital, EMH Regional Medical Center, about $11,000 for an angioplasty involving use of a drug-coated stent.

The cardiologist might be paid an additional $800 for the work.  That is well above the fees for seeing patients in the office.  And with the North Ohio doctors performing thousands of angioplasties a year — about 3,400 in 2004, for example — the dollars can quickly add up.

Some medical experts say Elyria’s high rate of angioplasties — three times the rate of Cleveland, just 30 miles away — raises the question of whether some patients may be getting procedures they do not need or whether some could have been treated just as effectively and at lower cost and less risk through heart drugs that may cost only several hundred dollars a year.

. . .

Experts know that changing the financial incentives can change the way medicine is practiced.

For example, Kaiser Permanente, the big health system that employs its own doctors, says its patients in Ohio, including some in Elyria, are slightly less likely than the national average to undergo the type of cardiac procedures the North Ohio Heart Center doctors perform so prolifically.

Kaiser’s cardiologists, who work on salary instead of being paid by the procedure, typically treat patients in that region at the Cleveland Clinic, where they have hospital privileges.  And they follow established protocols about when a patient should undergo an angioplasty, when drugs might suffice and when bypass surgery might be the best resort.

“It’s not just individual doctors making up their minds,” explained Dr. Ronald L. Copeland, the executive medical director for Kaiser’s medical group in Ohio.  With no financial reason to perform expensive procedures, the Kaiser doctors frequently choose to manage the patients’ heart disease with drugs only.  “Our doctors have no disincentive to do that,” Dr. Copeland said.

. . .

For many cardiologists, the natural tendency when they see a patient with heart disease is to perform a procedure to try to clear arterial blockages.  And patients, cardiologists say, tend to rely on their doctors’ judgment.

“It’s sort of like, you go to a barber and ask if you need a haircut,” said Dr. David D. Waters, chief of cardiology at San Francisco General Hospital, who is currently studying the effectiveness of different kinds of treatment for heart disease.  “He’s likely to say you do.”

. . .

Experts say it can be difficult to detect cases in which doctors cross a medical line and are clearly performing unnecessary treatments.

“A lot of decisions are discretionary,” said Dr. Harlan M. Krumholz, a cardiologist and professor at Yale.

“It’s about where the thermostat is set,” he said, arguing that doctors in a particular geographic area tend to be unaware if the way they are treating their patients is markedly different from the practices of their peers in other areas.

Traditional measures of medical quality are not set up to detect whether patients are being treated too much, he said, unlike the kinds of safeguards that prompt credit card companies to call their customers to discuss unusual spending activity.  “Right now there are no ‘smart’ systems in place,” Dr. Krumholz said.

In the absence of any real monitoring or oversight, doctors in most places, including Elyria, have few incentives not to favor the treatments that provide them the most reimbursement.  Dr. Waters, the San Francisco cardiologist, said that the way physicians are typically paid — more money for more procedures — results in too many decisions to give a patient a stent.

“You can’t be paying people large sums of money to do things without checks and balances,” he said.

 

For the full story, see:

REED ABELSON.  "In Ohio City, a Heart Procedure Is Off the Charts; SIDE EFFECTS; A Stent Epidemic."  The New York Times  (Fri., August 18, 2006):  A1 & C4.

 

Source of graphic:    online version of the NYT article cited above.

French Slow Innovation By Violating Apple’s Intellectual Property Rights

THE French take pride in their revolutions, which are usually hard to miss — mass uprisings, heads rolling and such.  So, with the scent of tear gas in the air this past month from the giant protests against a youth labor law, it was easy to overlook the French National Assembly’s approval of a bill that would require Apple Computer to crack open the software codes of its iTunes music store and let the files work on players other than the iPod.  While seemingly minor, the move is actually rather startling and has left many experts wondering (as ever):  What has possessed the French?

. . .  

If the French gave away the codes, Apple would lose much of its rationale for improving iTunes.  Right now, after the royalty payment to the label (around 65 cents) and the processing fee to the credit card company (as high as 23 cents), not to mention other costs, Apple’s margin on 99-cent music is thin.  Yet it continues to add free features to iTunes because it helps sell iPods.

Opening the codes threatens that link.  Apple would need to pay for iTunes features with profits from iTunes itself.  Prices would rise.  Innovation would slow.

Even worse, sharing the codes could make it easier for hackers to unravel Apple’s FairPlay software.  Without strong copy protection, labels would not supply as much new music.

 

For the full commentary, see:

Austan Goolsbee.  "ECONOMIC SCENE; In iTunes War, France Has Met the Enemy. Perhaps It Is France."  The New York Times  (Thurs., April 27, 2006):  C3.

25% Increase in Oil by 2015

OilPriceGraphic.gif  Source of graphic:  online version of the WSJ article cited below.

 

Despite fears of "running out" of oil, Cambridge Energy Research Associates’ new analysis of oil-industry activity points to a considerable growth in the capacity to produce oil in the years ahead.  Based upon our field-by-field examination of current activity and of 360 new projects that are either underway or very likely, we see capacity growing from its current 89 mbd to 110 mbd by 2015, a 25% increase.  A substantial part of this growth reflects the advance of technology, i.e., the rapid growth in "non-traditional" hydrocarbons, such as from very deep offshore waters, Canadian oil sands, and liquids made from natural gas.  (We are not counting in this increase the additional supplement that will come from ethanol and other fuels made from plants.)

There are important qualifications, however.  First, this is physical capacity to produce, not actual flows, which, as we have seen over the last year, can be disrupted by everything from natural disasters to government decision, to conflict and geopolitical discord.  Second, while prices are going up rapidly, so are costs;  and shortages of equipment and people can slow things down.  Third, greater scale and technical complexity can generate delays.  Still, a 25% increase in physical capacity by 2015 is a reasonable expectation, based upon today’s evidence, and that would go a long way to meeting the growing demand from China, India and other motorizing countries.

Admittedly, it may be hard to conceive of this kind of increase when oil prices are climbing the wall of worry, when each new disruption reverberates around the world, when Iranian politicians threaten $100 or $250 oil in the event of sanctions, and when so many geopolitical trends seem so adverse.  All this underlines the fact that while the challenges below ground are extensive, the looming uncertainties — and risks — remain above ground. 

 

For the full commentary, see:

Daniel Yergin.  "Crisis in the Pipeline."  The Wall Street Journal  (Weds., August 9, 2006):  A10.   

U.S. Economy Can Prosper, Even if G.M. Does Not

The fragility of success for large corporations is documented in the early chapters of the Foster and Kaplan book that is mentioned below. 

(p. 1)  THE announcement last week that General Motors would cut 25,000 jobs and close several factories is yet another blow to the Goliath of automakers and its workers.  But only if you work for G.M. is the company’s decline a worry.  For consumers, the decline can be seen as a symbol of healthy competition.

G.M.’s sales, market share and work force have all been falling for a generation, even as the quality of its vehicles has gone up.  Why?  Because its competitors’ products have improved even more.  Today’s auto buyers enjoy an unprecedented array of well-built, well-equipped, reasonably priced vehicles offered by many manufacturers.

. . .

(p. 3)  . . .  even if a new generation is drawn to G.M.’s products, recovery of its former position seems unlikely.  Other brands have improved, too:  J.D. Power estimates that for the auto industry overall, manufacturing defects declined 32 percent since 1998 alone.

There is also great pressure to hold prices down, which is bad for companies like G.M. with vast amounts of overhead.  According to the consumer price index, new cars and light trucks today cost less in real-dollar terms than in 1982, despite having air bags, antilock brakes, CD players, power windows and other features either unavailable or considered luxury options back then.

This means that during the very period that General Motors has declined, American car buyers have become better off.  Competition can have the effect of ”creative destruction,” in the economist Joseph Schumpeter’s famous term, harming workers in some places, while everyone else comes out ahead.

. . .

As it continues to shrink, G.M. may serve as an exemplar of what the world economy will do in many arenas — knock off established leaders, while improving quality and cutting prices.  In their 2001 book ”Creative Destruction,” Richard Foster and Sarah Kaplan, analysts at McKinsey & Company, documented how even powerhouse companies that are ”built to last” usually succumb to competition.

Competition can be a utilitarian force that brings the greatest good to the greatest number.  Someday when the remaining divisions of General Motors are bought by some start-up company that doesn’t even exist yet, try to keep that in mind.

 

For the full commentary, see: 

GREGG EASTERBROOK.  "What’s Bad for G.M. Is . . ."  The New York Times, Section 4  (Sunday, June 12, 2005):  1 & 3.

(Note:  the ellipsis in the title is in the original title; the ellipses in the article, were added.)

 

The full reference to the Foster and Kaplan book, is:

Foster, Richard and Sarah Kaplan.  Creative Destruction:  Why Companies that Are Built to Last Underperform the Market—and How to Successfully Transform Them.  New York:  Currency Books, 2001.