US broadband is not good. Huge portions of the country aren't getting broadband speeds, but even where they are, those connections are often bogged down by limited options, predatory billing practices, and a general lack of choice
We took things of our own. More than 22,000 people shared their internet bills with us in partnership with Consumer Reports. The Consumer Reports data team spent more than a year poring through the data to assemble a snapshot of how much people are paying for internet access in the US
This isn't a standard survey The national broadband market is not represented by the 22,000 bills we got. This is one of the most ambitious efforts of its kind to understand and give a unique look into what broadband looks like in America.
Consumer Reports has a more detailed and methodical writeup of the data where you can get a better idea of what we found. We want to take a bird's-eye view of what we found out and what it says about the experience people are having with the companies they are paying.
This is what is wrong with broadband in the United States.
Erik Carter for The Verge
If you have picked up an internet bill, you will most likely notice that this is the most basic fact about it. The average person in our sample pays about $75 a month for internet access, which is a bit higher than previous estimates, but nothing out of the ordinary. There are a few people who pay more than $150.
It shouldn't sound normal for most Americans. It's more than people in other countries pay. Our survey only looked at US customers, but there are many other surveys that can give you a better idea of the international picture. A survey done in 2020 by the Open Technology Institute found that prices in Europe dropped as low as $32 in Paris and as high as $40 in London.
Some of the price difference isn't bad. If you go by price per megabit, the picture gets a little better, but not enough to completely close the gap. There are many intangibles that can fill the rest of the gap.
The question of whether we are getting our money's worth is difficult because we are paying more.
Erik Carter for The Verge
The law of internet access is that if you don't like your carrier, you're stuck with them, and you end up paying more.
Those two claims are obvious, but it's difficult to prove them. The FCC maintains a comprehensive map of US telecom coverage, but those maps rely on self- reported data, which means they tend to paint an optimistic picture of what's actually available. Telecoms will claim to cover large areas where they don't actually have a line.
We should be up-front about the drawbacks of the data we have. We only have limited coverage of the 40,000-plus ZIP codes in the US, so anyone who showed up as the only bill in a ZIP code is lumped in the 1 column. It is unlikely that every carrier in the region has more than one bill. We can only guess based on the data, so we don't really know how many options these people have.
There is enough evidence to suggest that a lack of choice is a problem. 83.3 million Americans have only one broadband option according to a 2020 study. How much is hurting consumers?
The collected data begins to be useful. As you have more options, service gets cheaper, and we can see a clear trend for ZIP codes with more than one bill in the database. It is not a huge difference, but it is a reminder of how bleak the outlook can be without meaningful competition.
Erik Carter for The Verge
The most annoying part may be this. They still find a way to add a little more on top of the high prices.
The internet infrastructure fee, network enhancement fee, and data cap-related fees are some of the fees that can be found on your internet bill. There is no relationship between the cost of providing a service and the amount of money you pay. They can bundle those costs into the overall price of the service, even if there were. It is the equivalent of selling you a $5 sandwich and then adding a 50 cent fee.
Fees for equipment are a bit more legit. You can get out of the rental by buying your own, which will be cheaper and more hassle-free in the long run. It is possible for most people to not do that.
There is a lot of fees that are deserving of some shame. It is part of a larger strategy of making customers confused. Everyone is doing at least some of it even though Sonic andTDS are the least bad of the bunch. It is unlikely that any of these fees will go down in the future.
Erik Carter for The Verge
It is tempting to believe that new technology will save us from this problem. Satellite internet is used for internet access. We might be able to build a better kind of telecom if we escape the economics of laying fiber.
We aren't there yet. The issues with Starlink last year were not limited to any single service. Satellite is your only option if you are too far away.
This is reflected in the data we collected. Only a small percentage of the people who sent in bills were using satellite service. The prices for satellite weren't that different from the average wired connection, and that's before you factor in the quality of the connection The satellite revolution isn't here yet, so it doesn't mean it won't make things better.
We have to make the most of what we have.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
