3G/4G: Quality of Service vs. Costs

On October 28, 2011, Anatel issued Resolution No. 574 approving the Regulation for the Management of Quality of Multimedia Communications Service (RGQ-SCM), through which are established standards for the service in order to promote the progressive improvement of user experience issues related to compliance and performance of broadband connections.
In this resolution the Anatel determines that the minimum average speed of the connection speed is 60% of the contracted 12 months, and in 2014 is 80%. This means that a connection whose trabsmissão contracted rate is 10 Mbps, the average should not be less than 6 Mbps and 2014 should not be less than 8 Mbps.
As I learned of this resolution, felt more positive initiative the Anatel has taken action in order to provide a minimum level of quality of service, than the levels defined. A is more positive because I believe so, service levels were defined by the operators, ie, only one of the parties involved with regard to telecommunications ervices. The Anatel, in my view, acted according to its reason to exist as the regulator.
What about levels that were set, imagine how scared the operators. I say this because I've worked on infrastructure projects in telecommunications networks. I worked right in the design of links and the definition of service level agreements. I know that the levels required by the resolution are very high, which implies a very large investment, especially in 3G and future 4G networks. In mobile networks of broadband investments will be proportionately larger than in fixed network services. (In fact, oddly enough the fact that the Anatel not to mention quality of service targets in the draft announcement of 4G, deserves a larger analysis that fact).
However, it justifies the application of operators to suspend the resolution in order to return to the shameful 10% of the contracted bandwidth. I think a more appropriate application for an opening for negotiation of resolution targets set by the Anatel. This negotiation would be the most suitable way to reach the goals of Quality of Service.
Within these negotiations would reach goals that would be larger than the current and possibly lower than those required in the resolution. What are those goals? I prefer not to mention at this point, although I have in mind. Something that may be considered by operators is the profiling of users of mobile networks, where each profile is defined not only by the speed contradict, but levels of service quality that would not be less than that provided for in Anatel's targets. Something is already proposed by the scientific community in telecommunications, including my thesis.
Yes, based on targets that would be defined in a negotiation, operators could define user profiles, it is clear that services are priced differently. I believe that this negotiation between operators and Anatel, combined with profiling of users of mobile networks, is the best way to have mobile broadband services more appropriate. Technology to work with different user profiles exist, and can be implemented. I am eager and attentive to this new theme.