本文摘要：One of the big mysteries in corporate America is whether telecom regulators will allow theComcast/Time Warner Cable merger, announced in February, to close. President Obama’s comments on net neutrality on Monday provide a clue: the governm

One of the big mysteries in corporate America is whether telecom regulators will allow theComcast/Time Warner Cable merger, announced in February, to close. President Obama’s comments on net neutrality on Monday provide a clue: the government is going to make the business of delivering internet less attractive. This could undercut some of the objections to the deal.美国商界的众多疑团是：电信监管机构不会会让今年2月宣告的康卡斯特(Comcast)/时代华纳有线(Time Warner Cable)拆分交易顺利完成。美国总统奥巴马周一有关网络中立的言论获取了一条线索：政府将减少获取互联网终端服务的吸引力。这不会消弭一部分针对上述交易的阻力。The White House statement said Mr Obama favoured reclassifying internet service providers such as Comcast and TWC as “common carriers”. Such a move by the Federal Communications Commission (which is independent of the president) would regulate ISPs like utilities. The president favours prohibiting “paid prioritisation” in which content providers buy access to faster distribution.白宫声明称之为，奥巴马主张将互联网服务提供商(ISP)（例如康卡斯特和时代华纳有线）新的归类为“公共通信企业”。

独立国家于美国总统的联邦通信委员会(FCC)若采行这一措施，不会像监管公用事业公司那样监管互联网服务提供商。奥巴马还主张禁令有偿优先，即内容提供商通过收费取得更高速度的发给。Netflix struck such deals with several ISPs (including Comcast) this year but has since complained about them.今年Netflix公司就跟几家互联网服务提供商（还包括康卡斯特）达成协议这样的交易，但之后回应责怪诸多。

The net neutrality debate has taken on a David vs Goliath flavour. Scrappy Netflix heroically provides television and movies for just $8 per month while distributors gouge profits from their control of the pipes.关于网络中立的辩论如今具有圣经故事中大卫决斗歌利亚的意味。斗志昂扬的Netflix公司英勇地以每月8美元的价格获取影视内容，而互联网服务提供商则利用自己对管道的掌控，守住了大部分利润。The Netflix monthly fee roughly reflects the cost of acquiring content. The question then is whether that fee should jump to reflect the operating and capital costs Comcast incurs to deliver that content. Comcast and Time Warner are profitable businesses, unlike Netflix. But they are extremely capital intensive.Netflix的月租费大体体现了提供内容的成本。

问题在于，应不应该大幅提高收费，以体现康卡斯特为空投这些内容而产生的运营和资金成本？康卡斯特和时代华纳是盈利企业，不像Netflix。但他们也是极为资本密集的。

Comcast shares shed four per cent on Monday perhaps to the delight of its oft-irritated customers. But schadenfreude aside, US internet service remains slow and expensive compared with the rest of the world.康卡斯特的股价周一下跌4%，或许会令那些平时反感的顾客深感窃喜。但幸灾乐祸之余，美国的互联网服务相对于世界其他国家仍是较慢和便宜的。It is fun to fantasise about reallocating Comcast profits to Netflix. But consumers and their advocates should think about what competitive framework would lead to the necessary investment in broadband infrastructure.幻想一下将康卡斯特的利润重新分配给Netflix是冷笑话的。但消费者和反对他们的人应当想一想，什么样的竞争框架才不会给网络宽带基础设施带给适当的投资。

The costs of delivering content can be shared, but not avoided.空投内容的成本可以被承担，但无法防止。

本文来源：南宫28圈官网-www.kubernetek.com