The Fake Broadband Price War

from the it-doesn't-really-exist dept

One of the favorite lines trotted out by the telcos and their think tanks concerning the lack of competition in the telco world is that there obviously is competition, otherwise how would you explain the fact that DSL prices keep getting cheaper. The problem is that this is false. While it's true that many DSL providers now offer introductory, time-limited, promotional pricing, the price can go up quite a bit once the promotion ends. Not only that, but since they refuse to offer you DSL without a phone line, you're going to end up paying a lot more than the promotional rate no matter what. When someone from a think tank made the claim recently that DSL prices are now only $18/month, I asked to see the $18 bill. Not surprisingly, there was no response -- because such a bill doesn't exist. Once the forced bundles come in and the various fees, you're talking much higher prices. Now, there's a new study that gives actual numbers noting there is no real price war in broadband. The true price of DSL remains around $35 -- just slightly lower than cable broadband. Don't let the introductory prices, hidden fees and required bundles fool you. There isn't enough competition in the broadband space -- which is just the way the telcos and the FCC like it.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    Matthew, 11 Jul 2006 @ 2:21pm

    So you say so now, Cary, but the industry is counting on you being lazy. Or, perhaps they'll get lucky and will actually BE the best offer available.

    I have Cox, love them, 8meg down 1.5 meg up. Digital HD cable TV on two boxes with DVR. I pay nearly $200 a month. Yeah it is expensive, but I have all the channels except for premium HD services.

    My phone service is cellular and I get by with it.

    Now it vaguely sickens me that $200/month would provide 40MB down High Speed Internet for 8 or 9 residents in Korea, but I am assuming there is a good bit of governmental support in that regard.

    So long as network neutrality is equal to "we'll provide the bandwidth necessary so that all traffic is able to flow freely at practical cost" then I'm for it. This BS about needing to prioritize traffic for a fee is just the telcos being lazy. Such is the nature of things.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.