Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

iAi

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Sep 26, 2012
291
0
Yes, America, we really are paying too much for our monthly data plans. The New York Times reports that a new study from the GSM Association’s Wireless Intelligence research team has found that American Verizon (VZ) subscribers pay around $7.50 for each gigabyte of data they download, compared to European users who pay $2.50 per gigabyte. A Verizon spokesperson defended the company’s pricing to the Times and said that the study didn’t take into account that Verizon’s plans also offered unlimited voice and texting and weren’t straight-up data plans. Even so, taking voice and text prices out of the equation shows that Verizon customers pay $5.50 per gigabyte, more than double the European average.

Wireless Intelligence analyst Calum Dewar told the Times that one major reason for the price discrepancy is simply lack of competition in the American wireless market. According to Dewar, Europe has a total of 38 LTE wireless operators, and even small countries such as Finland, Portugal and Austria have three nationwide operators to choose from. In the U.S., meanwhile, only Verizon, AT&T (T) and Sprint (S) have anything approaching nationwide LTE services, especially since Sprint just started rolling out its LTE network this past summer.

NY Times
Americans Paying More for LTE Service

BERLIN — Does LTE, the superfast wireless service based on Long Term Evolution technology, cost too much in the United States? A recent study by the research arm of the GSM Association, a group based in London that represents mobile operators, suggests that may be the case.

The LTE network run by Verizon Wireless, the U.S. market leader, went live in 2010, shortly after Sweden turned on the world’s first LTE networks in December 2009.

Through June, there were 27 million LTE subscribers in the world, about half of them in the United States, according to TeleGeography, a market research firm based in Washington. South Korea is the second-largest market, with 7.5 million users, and Japan, with 3.5 million, is the third, according to the company.

LTE services are available in 21 European countries and used by 1.5 million people, TeleGeography says. Germany has the most users there.

A comparison by Wireless Intelligence, a unit of the GSM Association, suggests that being in the biggest LTE market has not brought low prices to U.S. consumers.

According to the study, Verizon Wireless, which is a joint venture of Verizon and Vodafone, charges $7.50 for each gigabyte of data downloaded over its LTE network. That is three times the European average of $2.50 and more than 10 times what consumers pay in Sweden, where a gigabyte costs as little as 63 cents.

Brenda Raney, a spokeswoman for Verizon Wireless, which is based in Basking Ridge, New Jersey, said the Verizon Wireless LTE plan cited in the study also included unlimited voice minutes, unlimited text, picture and video messages shared among 10 different data-capable devices and a mobile hotspot on the smartphone. Having a data-only plan, Ms. Raney said, would reduce the per-gigabyte charge at Verizon Wireless to $5.50 — still be more than twice the European average.

Calum Dewar, the Wireless Intelligence analyst who made the comparison, said there were several reasons for higher LTE prices in the United States.

First, U.S. operators like Verizon sell LTE as part of a larger mobile package, whereas European operators increasingly sell it as a stand-alone service at a lower price. U.S. operators are phasing out unlimited data plans, which is causing the price of data to increase above their levels in Europe, where a similar shift began two years ago. And you can buy LTE on a pay-as-you-go basis, often from virtual network discounters.

But another big reason for the trans-Atlantic discrepancy in LTE costs, Mr. Dewar said, is a difference in the levels of competition. Europe has the greatest number of operators selling LTE: 38 of 88 operators worldwide. Even small markets like Austria, Finland and Portugal have three LTE operators.

Until July, Verizon Wireless and AT&T Mobility were the only U.S. operators selling LTE nationally, Mr. Dewar said. And Verizon Wireless, which began selling LTE service in December 2010, has largely had the U.S. LTE market to itself in setting prices. In June, Verizon Wireless had 11.6 million LTE customers, and AT&T Mobility, the next biggest U.S. seller of LTE, had 750,000, according to TeleGeography.

The LTE comparison mirrors the trend for other types of mobile services, like 3G, which also tends to cost more in the United States.

U.S. consumers who bought mobile service through contracts spent $115 a month for 3G service, according to a survey conducted in May and June of 6,000 consumers in 12 countries by Ernst & Young, an accounting firm. In the Netherlands, the average was $51; in Britain, $59.

J. Scott Marcus, a senior Internet technology adviser at the U.S. Federal Communications Commission from 2001 to 2005, said European telephone behavior had developed in an environment of high prices, while U.S. habits had been shaped by low prices for landline and, initially, mobile service.

As a result, Europeans tend to be more restrained in calling and mobile surfing than Americans, said Mr. Marcus, who is an analyst at WIK-Consult, a research firm in Bad Honnef, Germany, owned by the German Economics Ministry.

The higher prices are slowing the adoption of smartphone services, according to Jonathan Dharmapalan, Ernst & Young’s global telecommunications leader.

“The No. 1 reason for customers’ discontinuing their use of a smartphone service or not taking the option is the fear of overspending,” Mr. Dharmapalan said.
 
Basic economics:

when demand increases at a constant supply price will increase. The rate the demand is increasing in America I am surprised the prices aren't even higher.

Telecom's aren't keep up as much with their infrastructure either keeping supply of data around the same. It's easy for companies to charge what they are charging now due to low competition. AT&T and Verizon then sprint is 2nd tier. Gives us telecom oligopoly.


We don't have any telecom subsidies in America either which will raise prices.
 
It is because americans will pay for anything. They figured since they can con us out of an extra $40 when most people don't even use that many minutes or texts that they can raise the prices high and people would still pay for it.
 
But there is a spectrum crunch, they dont have enough to go around that's why they moved to tiered pricing.

everyone knows that spectrum is going extinct.

It will only be a matter of time and there wont be any spectrum left running free, then you will all look back at this and wish they had made it even more expensive.

Those poor phone companies, being abused by all of those greedy people who have unlimited data plans. I just cant believe you would buy unlimited when offered, then expect to be able to use it, its you greedy users who made this happen. with unlimited $30.00 per month you have to use 12 gigs every month to match the Euro price per gig.

If all of you abusive unlimited users would just give up your plans then Im sure the companies would lower their rates.

Those poor telecom companies, god bless them every one.

Save the spectrum!
 
Last edited:
It is because americans will pay for anything. They figured since they can con us out of an extra $40 when most people don't even use that many minutes or texts that they can raise the prices high and people would still pay for it.

No, its because we want it and don't have a choice. They can charge a premium for the slowest data rates on the planet. Since Verizon and AT&T have no real competition they can both offer the same crappy plans as each other, and never compete for data, service, or price. They just keep collecting profit. It's to a point now that they don't even care if you switch to the other company...you will eventually come back...or if you don't who cares...they both carry the majority of the market.
 
I wonder if people take population density into calculating the cost of infrastructer.

North America is a large piece of land with a low population, it's a lot of land to cover.
 
I wonder if people take population density into calculating the cost of infrastructer.

North America is a large piece of land with a low population, it's a lot of land to cover.

True true, I have found a picture of the radio waves going from station to station, they take more work than you think. Its a big country to cover.

Those are buckets full of radio waves traveling across the nation.
bucketbrigade.jpg
 
Germany is a lot smaller than the US geographically. Thus here in the US we need more Towers, and more Maintenance people for the towers, and more infrastructure to make it work. Wouldn't that lead to higher costs and thus higher prices? Or do the foreign networks cover the same square millage as say ATT and Verizon?

edit: Beaten to the point.
 
I wonder if people take population density into calculating the cost of infrastructer.

North America is a large piece of land with a low population, it's a lot of land to cover.

Its also odd that these companies update their systems that don't matter.

Verizon has LTE with speeds up to 40Mb/s in small towns in GA with populations of 10,000....but I live in Santa Clarita, CA, Population 175,000 and we are stuck in 3G land. Its just so they can advertise that they have SO much coverage...but its actually a lie. They have coverage where it isn't needed.
 
No, its because we want it and don't have a choice. They can charge a premium for the slowest data rates on the planet. Since Verizon and AT&T have no real competition they can both offer the same crappy plans as each other, and never compete for data, service, or price. They just keep collecting profit. It's to a point now that they don't even care if you switch to the other company...you will eventually come back...or if you don't who cares...they both carry the majority of the market.

Like I said they will pay for anything. No matter how many people call Verizon and AT&T out at the end of the day they will still use them and nobody will care past that point. The average consumer thinks the prices are a little steep but it's their only option. The average consumer also doesn't consider alternatives like Cricket and Straight Talk.
 
Germany is a lot smaller than the US geographically. Thus here in the US we need more Towers, and more Maintenance people for the towers, and more infrastructure to make it work. Wouldn't that lead to higher costs and thus higher prices? Or do the foreign networks cover the same square millage as say ATT and Verizon?

edit: Beaten to the point.

The companies have no issues keeping up with costs. There is simply a lack of innovation and competition. Verizon and AT&T run the industry in the states and can essentially do anything they want. Sprint is at least trying to be competitive by differentiating its products.

I'm surprised the government hasn't stepped in to do anything about it as these companies get away with too much. I laughed when I heard you needed to switch plans to be able to use hotspot/tethering/facetime. Not only are these companies charging ridiculous amounts for data, they're double charging the data by limiting what you can and can't do with it based on how much you're paying.
 
Well one problem is the size of US. Telecom have to provide coverage at vast amount of highways and suburbs.

Another problem is the "not in my back yard" attitude in terms of cell antenna, making it difficult or expensive to add coverage in cities.

sadly, american telecom is a monopoly.

You meant oligopoly, because there are at least AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile.
 
This is an interesting question, but unfortunately the article provides us with useless information. First, it says there are only three providers of national LTE coverage across the US. Then, by way of comparison, it says there are 38 providers of LTE in Europe. WTF? How many of these 38 are providing coverage across all of Europe? All 38? Somehow, I doubt this. More pertinently, how many competitors are there in the London area, vs. the New York area? Paris? Munich? Milan? The article does say there are a whopping three providers in "small countries" such as Finland and Austria, so there are at most three providers that cover all of Europe.
 
I'm Italian and I am on H3G. For 5 euros a month I have:

- 2 hours of calls a day towards other H3G numbers
- 120 SMS and 120 mms a day towards other H3G numbers
- 60 minutes of calls a month towards any number
- 50 megs a day of data (Hsdpa)
- 1 free movie theater ticket a week for the last two years

No kidding.
 
for seven dollars here I can get,,,,,,,,, 28 text messages or 14 picture messages. that sounds fair.
 
for seven dollars here I can get,,,,,,,,, 28 text messages or 14 picture messages. that sounds fair.

Where's our free movie tickets, Verizon & ATT?!!!! Grrrrrrr, that makes me even madder!
 
Well one problem is the size of US. Telecom have to provide coverage at vast amount of highways and suburbs.

Another problem is the "not in my back yard" attitude in terms of cell antenna, making it difficult or expensive to add coverage in cities.



You meant oligopoly, because there are at least AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile.

yes
 
I wonder if people take population density into calculating the cost of infrastructer.

North America is a large piece of land with a low population, it's a lot of land to cover.

But then they have far more customers to balance that out.

That combined with not covering a huge majority of the land.
 
I live in northern Europe and for the equivalent to $75 per month (2 year contract) I get:

- The new iPhone 5 64GB
- Free and unlimited calls (within my country)
- Free and unlimited SMS
- Free and unlimited MMS
- Free and unlimited video calls (within my country)
- Free Spotify Premium
- Mobile broadband at 32 Mbit/s (60 GB bandwidth per month - If I use more the speed will decrease to 0.5 Mbit/s)

Edit: When it comes to broadband at home I pay the equivalent to $60 per month for 1000 Mbit/s via fiber with unlimited bandwidth.
 
Last edited:
USA is a very large country to cover.

Ask other large countries in size like China, Canada, Russia, Brazil, India.

How much do those customers pay for "nationwide coverage"

We already know the Canadians pay and arm and a leg for there services with 3 year contracts.

At least we have family plans in the USA to Leo offset some of the higher cost.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.