Posted by : Randy Cooper in (CDN)

Akamai: Why Charge More for Streaming Video Delivery vs. HTTP Delivery?

Over the last few weeks, I am getting more and more customers asking me why Akamai (AKAM) is quoting one price for streaming delivery and another price for HTTP based video delivery. And I’m not talking about Flash streaming where some CDNs still charge an Adobe license fee. Even with Windows Media, Akamai is charging a higher price to deliver content via a streaming media protocol as opposed to delivering content via HTTP.

I don’t know of any other CDN in the market that is pricing video delivery this way and as a result, I see Akamai not winning a lot of new deals in the market as customers don’t understand why they should be “penalized” for doing streaming over downloads. Why would Akamai care what protocol a customer is using?

Does it cost Akamai more to deliver streaming on their network versus downloads? It shouldn’t. If this was simply about Akamai charging more for its services, no problem. It’s a free economy and if you can get more for your services, more power to you. But that is not what this is about. This is about Akamai charging more for one protocol over another and not explaining to customers why it is the only CDN in the market doing this.


Make a comment