Gentlewoman from florida, ms. Roslehtinen,. There was a clear inconsistency in the fcc determination of where those services fit in the revelatory framework. And the roles they drafted. That they did affirm the Authority Act in the internet space. Which was in fact a big victory for the fcc. So my prediction about what is quite happened with Net Neutrality policy, this year, in fact very little. I think there is going to be a lot of gnashing of teeth and wailing about the issue right now. I think that will probably dissipate. This will continue to be an issue that occupies a space inside of the beltway and in tech policy circles. It is surly not going to be an issue that excites the popular imagination. There are too many other things that are more relevant to people. I think there will be some studying of tom wheelers indication that he wants to follow the basic offer to reevaluate the rules. There are two ways he can do that. He can look at what he can do under title i. You can look at reclassification. The classification is going to be a political fight. It is not the kind of issue that he wants to wade into. He is looking, as rosslyn has pointed out, he doesnt want to get bogged down in the issues left over by the previous chairman. He wants to do some things where he can get into an issue, examine it quickly, make a decision, move the agency forward, and make real tangible progress, and contribute to leaving a legacy where we can say after tom wheeler leaves the fcc he left americas networks and better conditions than when he started. Which will happen if he doesnt do a whole lot. Im going to pin you down here. I think i understand your predicament the fcc will not reclassify broadband as a Title Service during 2014, and the fcc will not appeal the court decision. We dont know about thirdparty groups to appeal. I think i hear you pretty can the fcc will not appeal are you predicting the fcc will not appeal. I will predict that. He is what a study the issue. A likely lou a likely lou if there are different ways rules can be formulated, the team as it is casebycase review. He is going to rely on the commonlaw approach. If people have propped him spring them to the fcc. A can be dealt with through adjudication. Not everything has to be dealt with in a rulemaking. Im going to ask anyone who wants to weigh in on this issue. We will start with jim. Lets take 1530 seconds. Im not going to weigh them. We have a sophisticated audience here. Not not everyone maybe not everyone is sophisticated as richard and you are. Define three terms. Title i, title ii, and Net Neutrality. Richard didnt want to define Net Neutrality. I want to make sure that people who are watching on television and elsewhere understand what the terms are. Im going to actually ask someone with expertise to answer that. We have a lawyer who is an expert on the subject. So, im going to defer how i want to characterize Net Neutrality until the end. Title i and title ii referred to titles of the medication sac. It gives the fcc titles of the communications. Title ii is the framework for regulating common carriage. Landline Telephone Network systems. It is a very odd authority. It only applies to telephone systems. The fcc has the power to classify the internet as title i or title ii. It has decided to pacify the internet as a title i service. Not entitled to common Carriage Service prayed title i Services Says it is classified allow the fcc to regulate information services. Basically, this is any Communication Network that isnt a common carriage network. The fcc has been approaching regulation of the internet under title i historically. The reason that the Net Neutrality decision happened, and it is interesting, title ii says you cannot treat title i services as common carriage. If you regulate something as common carrier, you can use common carrier you roles. If you upset the internet, you have a lot of power to regulate it. What you cannot do is create a title ii regime under title i. What is Net Neutrality . The simplest idea of what it is, the idea that broadband isps cannot prioritize traffic coming over their networks. Except for technical reasons, security threats. Example, im going to take on a specific isp. Lets call it timehousecast. They decide that theyre going to enter into a deal with bingle, a terrible name for a search engine. If you pay us 2 billion a year, all of our customers are going to get are your ties access to your search engine. Google and being, they are going to be deprioritized. This is one of the characterizations of Net Neutrality. The concern is that this will happen and folks believe this is a problematic concern. It may be. It may not be. We have not seen at a large scale a problem like this occur that under existing antitrust laws, under existing authorities, the agencies have been able to respond to. It seems the commissioner is saying lets take a step back and wait to see whether or not any of these problems actually occur that require us to use these broad Net Neutrality powers, and if it does they will handle on a casebycase basis. Im going to take it as your prediction. They will not reclassify to title ii services. That would be my prediction. I will make one more. As people continue to think about Net Neutrality, thereby to realize the same issue is animating the transmission consent concerns that we have in the aereo case. These are all cases that are focusing on the relationship between the content providers, and how content is distributed. I think were going to start to see them converge and be addressed as a unified set of issues. That is an insightful point. I agree. Does anyone else want to weigh in on these questions . I would just urge everybody to read chairman wheelers statement after the case decision was handled up. It was a thoughtful statement about dynamism in the internet echo system internet ecosystem. He will neither reclassify the internet nor appeal the case this year. This is a prediction. [indiscernible] i want to frame and then ill make a prediction. The critical issue with this decision is whether it will and sent the reallife providers of the billions and tens of billions of dollars that is necessary to continue to build out an increasingly buildout the infrastructure on which the internet runs, to do more, or whether we are not quite sure because of this decision. I am going to say that it will affect them to some the deep degree. It will in sent them incent to make decisions but the fcc needs to make it clear that they will not appeal and not try to reclassify in order for us to see the real explosion in investment that we need in this country. That is going to happen or not happen . Reclassify or not . My prediction is no reclassification. Any other predictions . We are running out of time. Does anyone else want to make a prediction . Im going to deal with the folks who have made pretty should unanimously. I dont think they will reclassify. I think it is entirely in the fccs purview because maybe others will appeal. I doubt verizon will appeal. It is possible some of the thirdparties will appeal. I dont think the fcc will go first. I rationale is i think the dog will not bark. Net neutrality advocates had made very specific and i are productions about the consequences about a world with Net Neutrality regulation. They have said that you will not be able to access the political content of your choice because rod band isp will rod band isps will impose their political views. Broadband isps will impose their political views. They also say they will act in ways that will make small startups unsuccessful. I dont think that will happen in 2014 and i think the impetus for a more aggressive stance is not going to be there. I think this will be an instance of the dog that did not bark. Were going to move on to some or productions. Some more predictions. Good morning, everyone. I will give you my prediction which i will hope if we can do a job for education, it will not come true. We are at the beginning of the year so we will see how we do. I expect that what we will hear more of in the media is this message about america falling behind. We hear this message about americans pay more for less. What about the broadband is too important to be left to the market. The market cannot do the job. My personal favorite pronouncement is that everything is better in europe. I live in copenhagen. Im going to share with you the perspective that europeans take and what the data shows. He for i begin i want to give a quick picture of the difficulty that i think the American People experience and try to understand broadband. It is coming from the media. The New York Times in the same month on the same issue, they sent very hundred 83 messages. On the one side we get the picture of the u. S. Struggling to keep pace. We hear we are falling dangerously behind. What is interesting is they have european correspondents based in london. One is very well versed in the telecom interest you. Industry. He says that european mobiles mobile players users have it at a cost. If the operators of so in profitable that they cannot afford in infrastructure. It is a shortfall of 150 billion which are not being invested to reach the 2020 bought it broadband gold. The europeans have a different opinion of how good their broadband is. This is another interesting picture. This is not propaganda but from the ee you commission itself. They hired a company that is a Consultancy Firm that works in broadband measurements. They have a sophisticated tool that looks at broadband next generation access across europe. I invite all of you to go to the European Commission website. It comes from the digital agenda scoreboard and you can download this map, the data behind it, the explanations. I think it is a very illustrative picture. This hardly looks like a utopia to me. It shows that there are pockets of nextgeneration access across europe. Essentially a few major cities. We can see that the netherlands, which are sorry, the dark green are the better areas. You can see the nordics, london, dublin, or solana, switzerland. Barcelona, switzerland. Is a countries that have these are countries that have nextgeneration access. Italy, parts of scotland, much of germany, and most of all of Eastern Europe have next to no next generation Broadband Access. Nextgeneration Broadband Access would be things like mobile lte, very fast dsl service and fiber to the premises. If you do a similar map to the United States to actually get a dark green across the 48 states with a few exceptions in the rocky mountains. Our lte Networks Cover 95 of the population. I wish we couldve hired them to do the same map. We would not have to aid 3 million but they can do it on much less. At any rate, europe is not a utopia when it comes to broadband. The other thing i would like to share with you from a data perspective. There is another criticism about we are not investing in networks and carriers are just sitting on these investments that they made years ago when harvesting returns. That is absolute nonsense. Since 1996 to today the american broadband providers have invested over 1. 2 trillion on the order of 50 billion a year. Last year alone it was up to 75 billion. Granted, infrastructure can going fiveyear cycles. When you build a technology you may have to do upgrades and so on. If you want to compare the u. S. And europe on its front. 10 years ago the u. S. 30 of the worlds broadband investment. Today it is less than 1 5. It has plummeted into the deep dive after the recession. The amazing part, what i think all americans should be proud about, is that through all this time, even through the financial crisis, investment in broadband has maintained a commitment at about 25 of the total of the worlds outlay. Even though the total cap in the world has increased to almost 340 billion. To put this in a simple term, americans are four percent of the worlds population. They enjoy 1 4 of its broadband cap expenditure. That is absolutely staggering. It is impossible to reconcile the criticism that the u. S. Is falling behind if you consider that we are getting 1 4 of all the money in the world to invest in Broadband Networks. To take it one step further, look at this number per capita. This data comes from a leading company that measures expenditure on Capital Equipment in broadband. This is a number derived by the population from u. S. Census and eurostats from europe. When you measure it on a per capita basis the United States is actually increasing its per capita mount at a greater rate and europe is declining. For every man, woman, and child in the United States, over 250 is being spent every year on capital investment. Edited by private providers. That is just by private providers. You also know the new America Foundation has a study about the cost of connectivity which is saying americans are paying more for less. They also rate rank copenhagen i live in copenhagen. Theyre saying you can get a product from a company that does not exist there. If you want that you also have to pay for the basic tv package. If you want to do that study in an honest way, you would also have to include the taxes you pay in europe as well the compulsory media license fees. In denmark, every person has to pay 460 per year to pay for the national tv stations, the media license fee to be state supported. On top of that you will pay 25 . In the u. S. I have taken this from actual bills not just go to the website and check on the front page actual customer bills. In the United States you pay basically more for the content but you get 200 channels versus 50 channels plus espn, all of your favorite stations. In europe you would get the same package and you can only get 63 stations and you have to pay all a cart you have to pay additional money for certain cable stations. This is my last point and i think this is, in addition into looking in investment, this is maybe the most underreported fact from 2013 that did not make it to i think the u. S. Trade commission is here today and if you are want to thank you for this tremendous report that is unprecedented. For the first time in 2013 the u. S. Trade commission reported on Digital Goods and services as exports. Normally they talk about the commodities we export, and for the first time they included Digital Goods and services as a category. That number was over 350 billion. If you rank that with our traditional exports and machinery it would be number three. My take away is our Broadband Networks are good enough to fuel the Worlds Largest digital export economy. From that perspective i dont think we are doing very bad at all. Thank you. Let me restate the production if i think i understand prediction to be the New York Times will continue to publish stories incorrectly reporting that the u. S. Is lagging behind europe in broadband. Yes. I would read your recipient european correspondence correspondentsreports. Very quickly. I think they will continue to publish mixed messages about this. On the day that the story came out that said we are falling dangerously behind they also had Technology Predictions for 2014. They were done by one of the tech bloggers on their blog. Nine of the 10 top things were wireless. In the story about Broadband Networks there was no mention of wireless at all. Hopefully the New York Times will come to realize that there is such a thing as wireless broadband and there is something called the internet of things if we dont over regulate the Wireless Networks that are necessary to enable the internet of things in the new uses of the internet that go beyond the content and netflix Movie Distribution models. Anyone else . Im going to way and in say i think the truth will break out. The facts are so overwhelmingly clear. A lot of people have made this argument for a long time. There was a. Of time when europe was ahead in three g deployment 3g deployment. I think there is a hangover from that today. It is unambiguous that the u. S. Is ahead of europe on every front and all european policymakers are saying that. I think the truth of all that will break out and we will see that reported in the mainstream media. You are not the missed. You are an optimist. It is part of my genetic makeup. Can i differ with you . I think that unfortunately, a lot of people play on teams. There is a team whose motto is, as rosalyn said, two important to be left to. The market. That team will continue to play with that theme. Is hard to see how that scene disappears. I think we will hear that over and over again and the facts will change some peoples mines but matters that should be factual and technologybased have become ideologicallybased. It is hard to dislodge that. I have to even the optimistic side. I think theres a lot of wisdom in that comment. Brett is going to talk about the consolidation and the reallocation of assets based on market oriented forces in the telecommunications and communications and internet ecosystem sector. A big theme in 2014 is likely to be some big merger and acquisition activity. You see stories every day about the possibility that sprint, the wireless carrier, might by t mobile buy tmobile. There is speculation if that does not happen the dish Satellite Network and by t mobile network could buy t mobile. They have gotten a lot of attention recently, crashing at ts party at the consumer electronic show which was entertaining. Theyre finding ways to stay in the news and