Quote:
Originally Posted by cass-hacks
Here in Japan, government and business got together to fund the laying of fiber.
Now, in the area I live, I have 4 different choices of 100mbs synchronous fiber service providers, which include phone service, and I pay about US$70 a month.
For ADSL, there are easily three times the number of sources.
Cable though is almost dead because there is not enough competition so prices are high and service is terrible. Cable here is now the new "300 baud", i.e. NOT "the new black".
On the subscriber side, things are great.
On the provider side, they are making money hand over fist, except the cable providers who are dying.
Other countries that have followed pretty much the same road map are not that much different while countries that allow and support companies in their imposing and inflicting of monopolies find they don't have as much money for expansion. There are even still providers in some countries that actually have bandwidth caps!
Go figure.  |
The comparison of the US telecom industry to that of Asia or Europe is flawed. The major US telecom companies have been restricted by government regulations while that of their foreign counterparts have been subsidized, if not owned, by their respective governments. Here in the US, cable companies have flourished without regulation and without competition due to their competitors being stifled by the government and their "franchise" agreements with cities that block competition from other cable companies.
In both models, the consumer suffers. While the telecom rates and service may be better outside the US, the citizens outside the US are paying extremely high taxes on their incomes to pay for the subsidy. Governments, the US and all others, are not known for their wise shopping habits because they are using other people's money.