100Mbit internet, phone service, 120 channels tv, $38

[Modelworks]

I know services can be cheaper in other countries, but this article about prices in France really shows how much we get over charged in the USA. I pay nearly 4 times that for less service.


http://www.lightreading.com/do...doc_id=168639&site=cdn

In France, where broadband and triple play competition is fierce, Numéricable is offering its 100 Mbit/s downstream service (no upstream speed information is published) for ?19.90, including unlimited national voice calls. A triple-play package that includes 120 TV channels costs ?29.90 (US$38), in line with prices from DSL-based rivals such as France Telecom SA (NYSE: FTE - message board), Iliad (Euronext: ILD - message board) (under its Free brand), and SFR (which now owns Neuf Cegetel). (See Iliad Gains Again, Euro Telcos Ramp Up IPTV Subs, Neuf Kicks On With FTTH Plan, and SFR to Swallow Neuf in $6.4B Deal.)

 

[Amused]

Couple things to think about:

1. The US is far more spread out than Europe requiring far more infrastructure to serve the same number of customers. Population density is the key to cheap, fast services to people in high density countries. Look at Japan.

2. Many utilities in Europe get massive government subsidies.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: Amused
Couple things to think about:

1. The US is far more spread out than Europe requiring far more infrastructure to serve the same number of customers.

2. Many utilities in Europe get massive government subsidies.

The main difference is competition. Large parts of Europe are requiring cable operators to share the lines. The USA has too many monopolies in telecom.

 

[Farang]

Yes this might have to do with the subsidies.. we have municipal cable here and it is still something like $25/mo for each cable and TV, if not more (I haven't lived here for a while). Good thing is that is lowers Comcast's prices, we get charged a lot less than other cities so yes in some ways you are getting raped.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: Amused
Couple things to think about:

1. The US is far more spread out than Europe requiring far more infrastructure to serve the same number of customers.

2. Many utilities in Europe get massive government subsidies.

The main difference is competition. Large parts of Europe are requiring cable operators to share the lines. The USA has too many monopolies in telecom.

I agree. That is a good thing and part of it, no doubt. But dig deeper and you will find that countries with the highest population densities have the fastest and cheapest service.

 

[lupi]

This is no secret, we get to pay more for less on these things than about everyone else.

 

[Amused]

http://www.advfn.com/p.php?pid...&symbol=NASDAQ%3ACMCSA

Net Profit Margin - 5YEAR AVRG. - 8.8

Just using Comcast as an example, it's not like cable companies are making huge, unreasonable profits.

Infrustructure costs and taxes are the main cause behind slower service and higher costs in the US.

Look at the tax rate on that page.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: lupi
This is no secret, we get to pay more for less on these things than about everyone else.

I knew it was less , but not that much less. I assumed it was probably half as much. But to get telephone , tv, internet for $38 ?

 

[Pacfanweb]

Originally posted by: lupi
This is no secret, we get to pay more for less on these things than about everyone else.

Not really, when you consider that the government there has a lot to do with that, and they steal the money from the people.

So they're paying for it one way or another.

 

[ICRS]

How many HD channels do they have, less than what I have I am sure.

 

[mugs]

Yeah, but who wants 120 channels of French TV?

 

[IEC]

Originally posted by: mugs
Yeah, but who wants 120 channels of French TV?

Winrar

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: mugs
Yeah, but who wants 120 channels of French TV?

:laugh:

Jerry Lewis Marathons?

 

[Tommouse]

I found just the opposite when my company was looking for connectivity in Europe. We currently have 100/100Mbps for less than 1k a month in Boston. So we tried to get something like that in our Galway office, no such luck. We ended up with 10/10Mbps for ~2k. Which is the exact opposite of what we expected going in. We had the same idea that we would get way more bandwidth for the buck but that wasn't/isn't the case in our situation. I know this is a super small sampling, and not in the consumer realm, but thought I would add my 2 cents

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: Tommouse
We currently have 100/100Mbps for less than 1k a month in Boston.

Through whom if I may ask? That's incredibly cheap for dedicated service.

 

[The Boston Dangler]

Originally posted by: lupi
This is no secret, we get to pay more for less on these things than about everyone else.

for telecom, yes. for everything else, except maybe healthcare, no.

 

[Tommouse]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Tommouse
We currently have 100/100Mbps for less than 1k a month in Boston.

Through whom if I may ask? That's incredibly cheap for dedicated service.

Cogent

Based on your reaction it adds validity to another idea we had. That due to our current rate being so low that nothing would really be able to meet the expectations of more for less.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: Tommouse

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: Tommouse
We currently have 100/100Mbps for less than 1k a month in Boston.

Through whom if I may ask? That's incredibly cheap for dedicated service.

Cogent

Based on your reaction it adds validity to another idea we had. That due to our current rate being so low that nothing would really be able to meet the expectations of more for less.

Are you On Net or Off Net? I am checking and I would only be to get Off Net service.

 

[Tommouse]

Yea I'm 99% sure we're On Net. I don't imagine their Off Net pricing is nearly as good.

 

[Svnla]

Try to get broadband in midsize/small cities in the South of the US. I am paying over $3x.xx/month for 1.5Mb/512 from ATT.

I think Frontline of PBS did a story about how the tecos promised to invest billions in the structure for broadband in the 90s (Clinton era) but only gave lip service.

 

[ultimatebob]

Originally posted by: Amused
Couple things to think about:

1. The US is far more spread out than Europe requiring far more infrastructure to serve the same number of customers. Population density is the key to cheap, fast services to people in high density countries. Look at Japan.

2. Many utilities in Europe get massive government subsidies.

Not to mention that they're not paying Spidey07's insanely high network consulting fees!

If it was up to him, I think that we'd still be paying $495 a month for our own personal T1 lines

 

[Newbian]

Living in France would still make this deal a gigantic failure for me.

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: Amused
Couple things to think about:

1. The US is far more spread out than Europe requiring far more infrastructure to serve the same number of customers.

2. Many utilities in Europe get massive government subsidies.

The main difference is competition. Large parts of Europe are requiring cable operators to share the lines. The USA has too many monopolies in telecom.

I agree. That is a good thing and part of it, no doubt. But dig deeper and you will find that countries with the highest population densities have the fastest and cheapest service.

That still doesn't explain why similarly (if not more so) dense places like New York City still have awful service. Density is a valid reason in some places, it is used entirely too often as an excuse however in places that are appropriately dense.

 

[Red Squirrel]

Wow, if I could get that here I would not need to pay 100's per month on a dedicated server, and I could have a server 5 times as powerful too. Just need decent power protection but that's a 1 time pay.

Here we pay more then that for 5mb/512k dsl lol.

 

[ebaycj]

Originally posted by: Tommouse
Yea I'm 99% sure we're On Net. I don't imagine their Off Net pricing is nearly as good.

This is very common in large cities here in the USA. Cogent is cheap. Others offer Metro Ethernet which is also cheap. Often the TOS / SLA on these lines is lower than more expensive stuff, but the price is so good that most people don't care.

EDIT:

This is also almost exclusively offered in business type buildings.