Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

dipsydoodle

(42,239 posts)
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 07:49 AM Oct 2013

Why is broadband more expensive in the US ?

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?

Men's haircuts, loaves of bread... it is surprising how much more expensive some things are in the US than the UK. Now home broadband can be added to that list.

The price of basic broadband, TV and phone packages - or bundles as they are known - is much higher in American cities than elsewhere, suggests the New America Foundation think tank, which compared hundreds of available packages worldwide.

Looking at some of the cheaper ones available in certain cities, at lower to mid download speeds, San Francisco ($99/£61), New York ($70) and Washington DC ($68) dwarf London ($38), Paris ($35) and Seoul ($15).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24528383

Broadband, TV and phone of my own package here in the UK is about £15.50 / month . That excludes the phone line rental which is another £14.50 and another £3.50 which covers unlimited international calls up to 59 minutes - you just redial after that. TV refers to the set top box and the all freeview channels.

55 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why is broadband more expensive in the US ? (Original Post) dipsydoodle Oct 2013 OP
Because we're sheople when it comes to communications. marble falls Oct 2013 #1
Because the corporations that write the laws made it so. marmar Oct 2013 #2
Yep ,,,,same reason drugs Cryptoad Oct 2013 #31
we have monopolies... spanone Oct 2013 #3
No we don't..... brooklynite Oct 2013 #5
political monopolies reddread Oct 2013 #7
oh yes we do... spanone Oct 2013 #8
good point, local search here steve2470 Oct 2013 #9
If by dozens, you mean two. progressoid Oct 2013 #28
Uh, no. jeff47 Oct 2013 #43
In Arkansas, at least, if you don't have a landline Art_from_Ark Oct 2013 #49
You need to differentiate wired and wireless ehrnst Oct 2013 #12
Yep, developing countries never went through a wired phase sammytko Oct 2013 #23
Answered three years ago, hasn't really changed... JHB Oct 2013 #4
"the phone company, which uses older telephone lines" BumRushDaShow Oct 2013 #15
they will replace aged infrastructure cabling with wireless reddread Oct 2013 #16
Fiber optic cables aren't widespread except for cities. Dash87 Oct 2013 #21
?????? Niceguy1 Oct 2013 #46
80.7% of the U.S. population lives in cities (and metro areas) BumRushDaShow Oct 2013 #50
Interesting. Does Comcast also update the connection to houses? Dash87 Oct 2013 #55
FiOS isn't widely available even today. AtheistCrusader Oct 2013 #42
I live in a hi-rise and literally just got a notice on my door today BumRushDaShow Oct 2013 #53
+1 jsr Oct 2013 #22
Because private companies are allowed to make their own rules. Mass Oct 2013 #6
How is Magic Jack working these days? DebJ Oct 2013 #26
It works well for us. I use it to call both the States and Europe, and we have no problems and it Mass Oct 2013 #27
thanks DebJ Oct 2013 #29
I've run into problems when calling another VoIP service. jeff47 Oct 2013 #44
I use Basic Talk xmas74 Oct 2013 #51
I wish we the people could come up with a way to get free, or minimal-cost xfundy Oct 2013 #10
Would the employees paychecks decrease also? sammytko Oct 2013 #24
That great republican theme "PRIVATIZATION" liberal N proud Oct 2013 #11
Part and parcel of Saint Ronnie's divestiture to escape the socialist dangers of universal access. freshwest Oct 2013 #17
++++++ fadedrose Oct 2013 #19
All of the above. seabeckind Oct 2013 #13
Addendum seabeckind Oct 2013 #14
+1 Egalitarian Thug Oct 2013 #45
The free market ain't free OLDMDDEM Oct 2013 #18
It's also much slower. Dash87 Oct 2013 #20
Tell me about it spinbaby Oct 2013 #30
this past week were some interesting hearings carried on cspan dembotoz Oct 2013 #25
Why is medical care so expensive compared to peer nations? davekriss Oct 2013 #32
Related Sam Sam Seder Majority Report podcast from February... JHB Oct 2013 #33
While I would love for my broadband Internet to be less expensive, NCTraveler Oct 2013 #34
3g and 4g access also JCMach1 Oct 2013 #35
Because we're more free. beerandjesus Oct 2013 #36
Because it's not government subsidized and our taxes are lower... bobclark86 Oct 2013 #37
Density? One_Life_To_Give Oct 2013 #38
Corruption. truebluegreen Oct 2013 #39
Because "Maximizing Shareholder Value", that's why. nt lumberjack_jeff Oct 2013 #40
Similar thing for outside urban areas. mwooldri Oct 2013 #41
Because . . . Freedom! Lex Oct 2013 #47
Because the lawyers and the lobbyists working for ... lpbk2713 Oct 2013 #48
Who do you think pays the salary of the M$M kings and queens? Rex Oct 2013 #52
Because we are a Corporate welfare state. nt adirondacker Oct 2013 #54

Cryptoad

(8,254 posts)
31. Yep ,,,,same reason drugs
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:17 AM
Oct 2013

cost more here than anywhere else.......you know 50 years ago title loan companies were considered Loan Sharks........ but now most are legally owned by politicians! Funny how that works!

brooklynite

(94,683 posts)
5. No we don't.....
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 08:05 AM
Oct 2013

There are dozens of broadband choices, but most people don't look past their phone company and their cable company.

http://www.dslreports.com/

progressoid

(49,992 posts)
28. If by dozens, you mean two.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:02 AM
Oct 2013

Well, three if I include my mobile service provider. But that's worse service at a higher price.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
43. Uh, no.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 12:20 PM
Oct 2013

My options for broadband Internet:

1) Time Warner Cable.
2) AT&T DSL
3) Other companies re-selling AT&T DSL

Don't have 4G cell service here. Even if we did, the really low caps would make it an unappealing solution. And I really have a hard time calling satellite service "broadband".

Don't have FIOS/U-Verse or other replacements for DSL. And with the relatively low speed of the DSL service, that means we get to pay Time Warner.

Art_from_Ark

(27,247 posts)
49. In Arkansas, at least, if you don't have a landline
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 07:43 PM
Oct 2013

it severely limits your broadband choices. I looked into 9 or 10 broadband companies for my mom, and only one of those did not require a landline telephone.

 

ehrnst

(32,640 posts)
12. You need to differentiate wired and wireless
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 08:22 AM
Oct 2013

There are many people who only have access to dial up - at very, very slow speeds. You can't run a business with that kind of slow access.

We are still in the pre-Tennessee Valley authority period when it comes to wired access to the internet, infrastructurewise.

sammytko

(2,480 posts)
23. Yep, developing countries never went through a wired phase
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 09:49 AM
Oct 2013

We still have all that infrastructure to maintain.

JHB

(37,161 posts)
4. Answered three years ago, hasn't really changed...
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 08:04 AM
Oct 2013
Why Broadband Service in the U.S. Is So Awful
Scientific American, Oct. 4, 2010

The average U.S. household has to pay an exorbitant amount of money for an Internet connection that the rest of the industrial world would find mediocre. According to a recent report by the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University, broadband Internet service in the U.S. is not just slower and more expensive than it is in tech-savvy nations such as South Korea and Japan; the U.S. has fallen behind infrastructure-challenged countries such as Portugal and Italy as well.

***

It was not always like this. A decade ago the U.S. ranked at or near the top of most studies of broadband price and performance. But that was before the FCC made a terrible mistake. In 2002 it reclassified broadband Internet service as an “information service” rather than a “telecommunications service.” In theory, this step implied that broadband was equivalent to a content provider (such as AOL or Yahoo!) and was not a means to communicate, such as a telephone line. In practice, it has stifled competition.

Phone companies have to compete for your business. Even though there may be just one telephone jack in your home, you can purchase service from any one of a number of different long-distance providers. Not so for broadband Internet. Here consumers generally have just two choices: the cable company, which sends data through the same lines used to deliver television signals, and the phone company, which uses older telephone lines and hence can only offer slower service.

The same is not true in Japan, Britain and the rest of the rich world. In such countries, the company that owns the physical infrastructure must sell access to independent providers on a wholesale market. Want high-speed Internet? You can choose from multiple companies, each of which has to compete on price and service. The only exceptions to this policy in the whole of the 32-nation Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development are the U.S., Mexico and the Slovak Republic, although the Slovaks have recently begun to open up their lines.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=competition-and-the-internet

BumRushDaShow

(129,336 posts)
15. "the phone company, which uses older telephone lines"
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 08:38 AM
Oct 2013

FiOS - that uses fiber optic lines end to end (replacing the copper), including fiber from the street to a home's wall jack, is "older telephone lines"? Really?



(I have Comcast but one would think that something published in "Scientific American" would be umm... "scientific"?)

Monopolies aside, I think that to compare a country that has done it the "hard way" - slowly evolving the technology since the 1800s (to cross a landmass many many times the size of the countries listed) to countries that went from "nothing" to "cell towers everywhere", is a bit disingenuous.

We "Marshall Planned" so many of those same fricking countries after WWII and have spent so much of our money providing for their military during that time (while ironically, that same "military" was the source of ARPANET, the original "internet&quot , while they took the surplus and strung up tech that we developed, within their tiny borders - and then they laugh at us.

And of course now, you have Crudze holding up the FCC Chairman position. Just can't win.

 

reddread

(6,896 posts)
16. they will replace aged infrastructure cabling with wireless
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 09:02 AM
Oct 2013

and so they will not be investing in expensive repairs that they should have done long ago.

Dash87

(3,220 posts)
21. Fiber optic cables aren't widespread except for cities.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 09:42 AM
Oct 2013

They're a rarity in the US at this point, and the telecom companies have no plans to change that. A majority of Americans still think that their Internet is "fast," mostly because the cable company tells them it's fast.

Fiber optics hasn't caught on in the US, and there's no incentive for it to catch on. Prepare for many more years of an inferior infrastructure, and certainly not fiber optic cables (unless if you're lucky enough to be the exception).

Compared to the rest of the world, Comcast's "fast" Internet is laughably slow.

Niceguy1

(2,467 posts)
46. ??????
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 05:50 PM
Oct 2013

Where I live fiber optic is everywhere, and all new subdividions have it. Andd I live in an area yhat many here consider a redneck wasteland.

BumRushDaShow

(129,336 posts)
50. 80.7% of the U.S. population lives in cities (and metro areas)
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 08:08 PM
Oct 2013
http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/2010_census/cb12-50.html

And as a note, much of Comcast's network infrastructure IS fiber. They did that some time ago. What currently isn't fiber from them is from the street into the home. As it is, my worksite put fiber in 20 years ago, so it's not a new technology at all. The compression algorithms and switch gear are what might be the current limiting factors and as is often the case, there is the odd competition between telecomm providers regarding what should be considered "standard". And many of these countries have state-owned infrastructure, so they set the standard and that's it.

If anything, the bigger issue here is net neutrality and how bandwidth control is managed, and that is where corporatocracy comes barreling in.

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
42. FiOS isn't widely available even today.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 11:02 AM
Oct 2013

"Verizon announced in March 2010 they were winding down their FiOS expansion, concentrating on completing their network in areas that already had FiOS franchises but were not deploying to new areas, which included the cities of Baltimore and Boston, who had not yet secured municipal franchise agreements.[12] This may violate Verizon's agreements with some municipalities and states, since Verizon has collected revenue to deploy infrastructure upgrades that never occurred.[13]"

When that SA article was written, FiOS was available to less than 18 million Americans, and in-use by less than 4 million subscribers.

That's not even 2% of all Americans.

BumRushDaShow

(129,336 posts)
53. I live in a hi-rise and literally just got a notice on my door today
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 08:25 PM
Oct 2013

regarding Verizon coming into each apartment this week "to check for possible FIOS hookup options".

I never expected anything from Verizon for FIOS in here. AT. ALL. (although there is conduit and comm closets where Comcast lines and telecomm bundles are run, so there's no reason why they can't do it, although it would be a bit labor intensive if they need to do it to each unit). It seems the main focus for Verizon outside of the FIOS was to replace the copper voice landlines with fiber and they have done this routinely as part of their FiOS installs. In fact, they have been pushing hard in my sister's suburban community to have residences dump the copper landlines and replace them with their fiber lines in the residence for VoIP (or whatever their equivalent is) so they can tear down the old poles and lines (that go down constantly in storms because the lines were strung along and under treelines).

However, IMHO, as an earlier poster noted, they may end up going more for wireless as a cheaper route, although they would probably still need to feed the data to a fiber infrastructure for now.

Mass

(27,315 posts)
6. Because private companies are allowed to make their own rules.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 08:07 AM
Oct 2013

MY MIL pays 140 for TV + broadband. (we moved her to magic Jack for phone). There are all sorts of gimmicks on the bills, including taxes and equipment rentals that re simply ridiculous and make it impossible to check the bill. She is 93, so we cant mover her easily to online television, but we would if we could, frankly, because the cost is ridiculous, but there is no other choice in broadband.

We only have broadband. For the first year, we only paid $29. After one year, the discount disappears and we have to pay $49 (yikes). We have a Aereo contract at $8 a month for TV. When we called our broadband provider for TV contracts, the least expensive was $30 for a year moving to the same $49.99 after that. We said thanks but no thanks. We use magicJack for telephone as well.

DebJ

(7,699 posts)
26. How is Magic Jack working these days?
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 09:56 AM
Oct 2013

I had a cousin and a sister who tried it maybe 5 years ago.
I could only hear every other word; conversation was impossible.

Mass

(27,315 posts)
27. It works well for us. I use it to call both the States and Europe, and we have no problems and it
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:02 AM
Oct 2013

is considerably less expensive than Comcast or Charter.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
44. I've run into problems when calling another VoIP service.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 12:26 PM
Oct 2013

When my MagicJack-using sister calls me on my Vonage phone, there's a lengthy delay in the conversation. Kinda like calling very, very long distance back-in-the-day.

If either one of us is using a normal phone service (ex. cell phone), then it's fine.

xmas74

(29,675 posts)
51. I use Basic Talk
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 08:14 PM
Oct 2013
http://www.basictalk.com/?CMP=OBR-FLS-Exact-KNC-GOO-Brand-PDSRCH-2013-BASICTALK-VER1

It works quite well-enough that I use it for my part time job doing outbound sales from home. No one would ever know the difference.

xfundy

(5,105 posts)
10. I wish we the people could come up with a way to get free, or minimal-cost
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 08:20 AM
Oct 2013

broadband/wireless. I think it's possible, we could share accounts and pay a tiny amount. But some would complain that "others" aren't paying their share, like those with little income.

freshwest

(53,661 posts)
17. Part and parcel of Saint Ronnie's divestiture to escape the socialist dangers of universal access.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 09:15 AM
Oct 2013
And the insidious nature of unions, cheap gas by jumping in bed with the Saudis... Rot in Hell, Ronnie!



seabeckind

(1,957 posts)
13. All of the above.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 08:30 AM
Oct 2013

The same question can be asked about cell service.

Or health insurance.

Or health care.

Or energy.

Or transportation.

Or banking.

Or, most importantly, political choice and representation.

It is a systemic problem in our society caused by the laissez faire trend which enabled the breaking up of all those anti-trust regulations that were fought so hard for long ago.

I don't have the actual executive order on this pc (using the wife's) but there were 2 orders signed by Reagan which basically gutted the anti-trust oversight and yanked the teeth out of the gov't's competitive oversight.

Those were the straws.

After that it was just a matter of time before the cable companies could define their "competition" by dividing up the herd. Ie, each company bid on a corral. And after they got the corral they got to make the rules inside it.

Communications infrastructure would work well as a public utility. But we don't have those any more.

seabeckind

(1,957 posts)
14. Addendum
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 08:36 AM
Oct 2013

Having the FCC head chosen by industry doesn't help much.

Kinda the same as having the treasury secretary blessed by the bankers.

Mind that prod...

 

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)
45. +1
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 12:33 PM
Oct 2013

If we don't address this we're just going to keep sliding downhill like we have for the last 30 years.

OLDMDDEM

(1,577 posts)
18. The free market ain't free
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 09:27 AM
Oct 2013

The RWs will tell you that this is the best way to make something work in the marketplace. Well, the free market isn't free and will cost you an arm and a leg if you let it.

Dash87

(3,220 posts)
20. It's also much slower.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 09:37 AM
Oct 2013

In a lot of places there's at most two carriers, and they're not in direct competition.

spinbaby

(15,090 posts)
30. Tell me about it
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:08 AM
Oct 2013

We pay $100 a month for satellite Internet that's theoretically up to 10 Mbps but often doesn't break 1 Mbps.

dembotoz

(16,823 posts)
25. this past week were some interesting hearings carried on cspan
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 09:54 AM
Oct 2013

hearing on wired communications---if you think things are shitty now just you wait.
Att and the other incumbent carriers want all their marbles back the the republicans are more than happy to help them.

part of the problem with broadband is just the fact that the us is just a large county.
dsl and cable and fiber require new infrastructure and to wire small towns and farms is not cheap.

think wireless is the solution--is it because att is so kind and generous.....

pay attention
If the likes of ATT gets fcc approval to abandon their wired switches (were lots of the competition co locates) it will be pre 1996 all over again. And we will be royally fucked

davekriss

(4,626 posts)
32. Why is medical care so expensive compared to peer nations?
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:17 AM
Oct 2013

Unregulated, neo-monopoly capitalism capable of imposing high rents on all kinds of goods and services.

JHB

(37,161 posts)
33. Related Sam Sam Seder Majority Report podcast from February...
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:18 AM
Oct 2013

Last edited Mon Oct 28, 2013, 11:35 AM - Edit history (1)

...on telecom monopolies. Relevant interview starts at the 13:20 mark.

http://majority.fm/2013/02/26/226-susan-crawford-the-fight-against-telecom-monopolies/

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
34. While I would love for my broadband Internet to be less expensive,
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:29 AM
Oct 2013

I can't think of anything in my life that has the same ROI as my broadband connection and access to the internet. It also provides great educational resources and joy in life. It does need to be made available to all. It has provided so much for me over the years, I would like for those with less means to be able to use the same service that I am. I do understand that libraries can be used, but that is different than a single mother being able to use it to help look for a job after she has put her children to bed at night.

bobclark86

(1,415 posts)
37. Because it's not government subsidized and our taxes are lower...
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:37 AM
Oct 2013

Same reason gas is like $10 a gallon in England, while it's about 2 cents a gallon in Venezuela. It ain't rocket science. They also pay a 20-percent sales tax (sorry, VAT... but the same basic idea) on everything. Rocket science it ain't.

Now, try buying high-end audio electronics and other goodies in England. A good guideline is both have the same numbers, but in the UK it's in pounds and the US it's in dollars (or half price).

One_Life_To_Give

(6,036 posts)
38. Density?
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 10:49 AM
Oct 2013

Some of it is because we have slightly fewer people than Europe. But we are spread across many more hectares. So many more hotspots and cables/fibre's to service the same headcount.

mwooldri

(10,303 posts)
41. Similar thing for outside urban areas.
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 11:00 AM
Oct 2013

Feel free to check this out:

http://www.samknows.com/broadband/broadband_checker?address=true enter Post Code of RH14 0QD, and house number 8.

BT is proud to offer you voice and dialup to this small village on the West Sussex/Surrey border. The population is fairly small but usually very well off, but still considered unprofitable . There is a wireless ISP - Kijoma - you can get "up to" 30 Mbit/sec down, and various up speeds - a "home standard" plan costs £18/mo - about $29/mo. Bandwidth is metered between 8pm and 11pm (10Gb a month) otherwise un-metered at other times.

For TV in the UK, there is a cost of £12.13 a month (about $19.40) for the TV licence. Every household needs to pay this fee to watch TV legally - so to compare a "bundle", the licence fee needs to be taken into consideration.

lpbk2713

(42,766 posts)
48. Because the lawyers and the lobbyists working for ...
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 07:16 PM
Oct 2013



the telcos and the cablecos don't come cheap. And then you have to figure in the junkets and
"fact finding trips" at 5A resorts and golf courses that pols attend as guests of the ISP's.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
52. Who do you think pays the salary of the M$M kings and queens?
Mon Oct 28, 2013, 08:17 PM
Oct 2013

Someone has to pay for Wolfees 'stash.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why is broadband more exp...