Why Is Broadband More Expensive In the US Than Elsewhere?

[dmcowen674]

10-28-2013

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/1...utm_source=rss1.0mainlinkanon&utm_medium=feed

Why Is Broadband More Expensive In the US Than Elsewhere?



"The BBC reports "Home broadband in the US costs far more than elsewhere. At high speeds, it costs nearly three times as much as in the UK and France, and more than five times as much as in South Korea. Why?...'Americans pay so much because they don't have a choice,' says Susan Crawford, a former special assistant to President Barack Obama on science, technology and innovation policy. We deregulated high-speed internet access 10 years ago and since then we've seen enormous consolidation and monopolies, so left to their own devices, companies that supply internet access will charge high prices, because they face neither competition nor oversight."

 

[dmcowen674]

Have to say it.

It's all Bush's fault.

Well, him and the Republicans de-regulated everything when he was in office and this is what America got, never un-did it and deserves to be screwed.

 

[Kwatt]

Free (taxpayer bailout) Market


.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

This has nothing to do with deregulation and frankly that is a bullshit reason as deregulation is also the reason (along with technological end-arounds against state granted monopolies, e.g. DishTV and Direct TV competing against cable companies) why more and more businesses are actually starting to compete with cable companies like Comcast in providing broadband services.

It has everything to do with how local and state governments granted state sanctioned monopolies to companies like Comcast and AT&T. It is those government granted contracts which only allowed for one major player in most cases to be able to establish and build the major infrastructure for today's broadband connections in a given region. If you want more competition then break up the government granted monopolies held by cable/phone companies on that infrastructure and allow other companies to roll out their own competing infrastructure which is what companies like Google are doing.

 

[TreVader]

The US is massive. To offset the cost of running fiber optic lines to all the hillbillies in west virginia, Utah, you name the state they charge everybody exorbitant prices. If they were charging by the cost to implement in an area, then in LA and NYC people would be paying 90 cents a month and people in alaska would be paying $800 a month.

So basically, it's rural peoples fault. The US has a massive amount of land to cover, coupled with twice as many people (at least) as any european nation.

 

[TreVader]

Most of the problems we have in the US are rural people's fault. They are both poorly informed and highly influential. That combined with a social stigma against education results in.... Sarah Palin.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

The US is massive. To offset the cost of running fiber optic lines to all the hillbillies in west virginia, Utah, you name the state they charge everybody exorbitant prices. If they were charging by the cost to implement in an area, then in LA and NYC people would be paying 90 cents a month and people in alaska would be paying $800 a month.

So basically, it's rural peoples fault. The US has a massive amount of land to cover, coupled with twice as many people (at least) as any european nation.

It has nothing to do with running fiber optic lines to rural areas. Those places either pay higher prices for their connections, have no connection at all or have only one major provider with a local monopoly granted by local and/or state governments.

 

[DucatiMonster696]

Most of the problems we have in the US are rural people's fault. They are both poorly informed and highly influential. That combined with a social stigma against education results in.... Sarah Palin.

This is simply flat out false.

 

[Doppel]

I'm not sure, but I know time warner keeps raising rates and meanwhile its margins INCREASE. Broadband is a fat, fat overfed cash cow. My area has no decent alternative. Until it does, I bend it over and beg for it. That's just how it is. At least I do my part to move hundreds of gigs/month in content. The real people who get screwed are those who only email and are too ignorant to call their cable provider every 6-12 months for the bitch and moan that, par excellence, grants a discount on the retail rate. I pay less than such a neighbor and consume far more. Silly, really, but I'll take what I can.

 

[Matt1970]

Broadband is NOT $70 here in NY. Mine is $55 and that's because I forgot to cancel the $10 Turbo otherwise it would be $45. I have Time Warner and so does the majority of the state.

"We deregulated high-speed internet access 10 years ago and since then we've seen enormous consolidation and monopolies"

Also Bullshit. 10 years ago you had Time Warner which around here is the cable provider for high speed internet. That was it and much the same for most of the country unless you wanted ISDN. If you wanted high-speed, it was through cable. Now Verizon has Fios, you can get High-speed Internet through Satellite or through one of the many Cellphone providers. There are more high-speed internet options than there ever was.

Also, I am glad other countries have 100 Megabit downloads, but where are you going to download from that can keep up with that? Netflix, Microsoft, Filehippo, Dowload.com, C-net and most others all choke you off, some of them around 700K.

 

[First]

Why Is Broadband More Expensive In the US Than Elsewhere?

Because you touch yourself at night.

 

[Matt1970]

Because you touch yourself at night.

LOL

 

[fstime]

Simple, lack of competition. Here, it's either the cable company or ATT DSL.

When I was in Europe, you were able to choose from a variety of DSL companies; and the connections are not slow either. I think 20 mbps ADSL was around $20/month, $40/month bundled when phone line.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally Posted by dmcowen674
Why Is Broadband More Expensive In the US Than Elsewhere?

Because you touch yourself at night.

There it is folks, the best P&N has to offer.

 

[brandonb]

I live in a rural area. My taxes pay for the inner city welfare queens to get free internet, but I can't get anything better than dialup. I'd gladly pay $100-200 a month for some sort of DSL/Cable even if it was 5Mbps. But I can't. Hell, I'd pay for a T1 line if I could.

Satellite or barely functional 3G (both = 5 gig a month limit) data through cell phone hot spots. Boo!

Come to me internet! Take my money now.

 

[Newbian]

Originally Posted by dmcowen674
Why Is Broadband More Expensive In the US Than Elsewhere?



There it is folks, the best P&N has to offer.

So make sure you post those videos unless your connection is too slow to upload it to youtube.

 

[werepossum]

This is simply flat out false.

Wha . . . ? You're not buying the narrative that hillbillies who largely don't even have access to broadband are the reason it's so expensive? That's just crazy talk.

Because you touch yourself at night.

LOL!

Dave has a hot wife - he doesn't have to touch himself at night.

Simple, lack of competition. Here, it's either the cable company or ATT DSL.

When I was in Europe, you were able to choose from a variety of DSL companies; and the connections are not slow either. I think 20 mbps ADSL was around $20/month, $40/month bundled when phone line.

Pretty much. The generally lower population density coupled with government-endorsed monopolies gives us little competition.

Here in Chattanooga the Electric Power Board (a self-supporting government electric utility) put in fiber to every household and business they serve to eliminate the meter readers. To finance that, they began selling Internet, television and phone service as well. Comcast and AT&T raised holy hell but it stood up in court. The EPB offers every household 100Mbps for $57.99 or 1,000Mbps for $69.99 monthly, and that's down AND up. I don't want to sound like an EPB commercial (we actually have Comcast) but that is government done right, bitches.

 

[IGBT]

lack of competition due to fixed markets and liberals licking the glue off the back of wall paper.

 

[gevorg]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopoly

 

[TreVader]

It has nothing to do with running fiber optic lines to rural areas. Those places either pay higher prices for their connections, have no connection at all or have only one major provider with a local monopoly granted by local and/or state governments.

Wrong. How could it possibly cost verizon the same amount to run fiber optic to me and say the other 40k people within a 4 mile radius vs the 3 people within a 4 mile radius of you name the place in wyoming? Here, assuming 25% subscription, you get 10,000 payed customers for a very small distance of cabling. In wyoming, assuming the same number , you MAYBE get one!


Plz explain how the extra $20/MO verizon might charge some redneck covers the overhead to get him that service vs the 10,000x as many people here?

And you can bet if that redneck doesn't get his internets, it's Obamas fault

 

[TreVader]

This is simply flat out false.

Are you kidding me? This time you don't even have an argument.

 

[Matt1970]

The EPB offers every household 100Mbps for $57.99 or 1,000Mbps for $69.99 monthly, and that's down AND up. I don't want to sound like an EPB commercial (we actually have Comcast) but that is government done right, bitches.

Wow, it's rare that I max out my 20 Mbps connection. Are you sure 1,000Mbps up and down is correct? That Gigabit internet.

 

[Zodiark1593]

I live in a rural area. My taxes pay for the inner city welfare queens to get free internet, but I can't get anything better than dialup. I'd gladly pay $100-200 a month for some sort of DSL/Cable even if it was 5Mbps. But I can't. Hell, I'd pay for a T1 line if I could.

Satellite or barely functional 3G (both = 5 gig a month limit) data through cell phone hot spots. Boo!

Come to me internet! Take my money now.

How would someone even play online games with satellite, or god forbid, if Microsoft had their way and you needed functional internet to game at all.

 

[nageov3t]

I'm surprised there's not more of a push for subsidized broadband on the Federal level... it would make it so much easier to spy on everyone.

 

[Svnla]

I used to pay $20 per month for ATT DSL 6 Mb (maximum speed available) but now the same DSL is up to $35 a month. DSL only, no phone and nothing else. Cable is about the same price if I don't bundle with TV.

Duopoly FTL.