- It is clear to me that metering makes sense from a microeconomic standpoint, but only during episodes of congestion. If there is no congestion, the marginal cost of a packet is exceedingly small, so it may well cost more to collect and bill for traffic than the revenue it produces.
- As a consumer of broadband services, I prefer to pay flat rate prices. My wireless provider gives me the option of different service levels, and I have chosen to pay more for the "unlimited" tier because I would rather not accept the risk of usage charges should I exceed my monthly allotment (I realize that "unlimited" may not actually mean "unlimited" ...)
- As commenters on the previous posts have pointed out, telcos are profit maximizers, so metering is a way for them to price discriminate more finely than they now do with service tiers.
Since carriers have considerable freedom in setting prices, they have obviously determined that usage tiers make more sense for them than pure metered prices. Don't you think that they have calculated the costs and benefits of different pricing structures? Why are we having this debate in the first place, since consumers and carriers have clearly settled on a set of pricing and consumption structures independently?