Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why are call plans so expensive in the USA?
- Thread starter whitedragon101
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The USA is larger, there are more people and thus a greater need for more infrastructure...i.e. more cell towers needed to cover everyone.
However our phones are vastly cheaper.
nationwide?
there was on city in sweden they used as a test bed for LTE but it doesn't count
in the USA its already deployed at a national level
and even then these are tiny countries compared to the USA. most states here are A LOT larger than these countries
It's an effective duopoly. If you pay attention to the marketing campaigns Verizon and at&t will respond to each other but they generally don't respond to the second tier carriers TMO & Sprint. Those 2 have to provide unusual offers to attract customers. The big 2 effectively collude to keep service costs high.
Compare the sizes of Verizon and at&t to TMO & Sprint.
Large coverage areas, sophisticated networks, high-speed data, and lots of users needing all of this.
There will be a bunch of people here who tell you its greed or theft..... These companies exist to make money. It also happens they provide a NECESSARY service to customers. The difference between the US and other countries is we have better networks, faster networks and larger networks than anywhere else.
Sure, competition might have a bit to do with it. T-Mobile is making waves and the addition of a strong third player has already begun to cause some disruption.
But really, let's look at the facts. I pay roughly $150 for two devices (my wife's and mine) which we use hourly. I pay roughly the same price for cable - something I don't use nearly as much as my cell phone. I pay close to $150 in student loan INTEREST. I pay about $150 a month for electricity at my house which goes largely unused most of the day. You get the idea....
In a Capitalist society, the market dictates pricing. As people begin to move to TMobile, you'll see AT&T's prices come down some - but consider this: Verizon has the largest consumer base of any of the US telcos and they are also the most expensive. Why? Because customer service, reliability, speed and coverage play a role.
Same thing when comparing US telcos to UK ones. What's the largest area a UK telco covers? Do they cover 99% of inhabitants in that area like AT&T and Verizon do? What types of data speeds do you get in the UK? We've had LTE for years - essentially the entire nation is covered in it depending on which telco you use.
So if you want to be bitter and call it selfishness, go ahead. I call it charging what the market dictates for a more advanced and reliable version of a necessity we all use constantly.
----------
Right - which is why AT&T and TMo have a very public fued going and AT&T's trade-in/ETF reimbursement are targeted at TMo.....
----------
Forgot this part - we do get our phones highly subsidized. Even when we don't, they generally are cheaper than other parts of the world.
----------
I've got a newsflash for ya'll.....I work in Sales for a debt collection agency and I can tell you right now - big telcos and cable companies and the like would MUCH rather have you on a pre-paid account than a post paid one.
The amount of debt these companies carry and write off is astonishing. People are too turned off, or aren't used to, the idea of paying full price for a smartphone though.
As has been mentioned all of these big telcos have pre-paid arms. AIO is AT&T's for instance. Offering cheaper plans with the same coverage from essentially the same company. Why don't more people jump on those? Brand is one reason, but I'd be willing to bet unsudsidized smartphone prices are the other.
Last edited:
- 97%-99% depending on the network
- on an iphone 5 my friend Dan next to me is getting 19Mbps on speedtest.net . This is using the advanced 3G network tech(double data rate) we have had for some time as a stepping stone pre 4G. 4G started a year ago and is coming in city by city and people are getting 50Mbps .
I thought that $40 is actually expensive but before pointing that out I wanted to be sure of my ground and check that it did not include paying off the cost of the phone.
This proves my point. You pay $40 for an unlimited plan that reduces speed after 250Mb. The prices in the USA are so high you think this is a good deal. Please don't take that as an insult as in the USA it is good compared to the options you have. But compared against charges in Europe it is extremely high. For example I am in the UK I am on a plan that is totally unlimited on calls and data and I pay $24 (£15).
Basic rules for what you're asking…
Verizon: you must have a carrier phone. You can't bring another CDMA carrier's phone.
Sprint: see Verizon.
AT&T: any unlocked GSM or locked to AT&T.
T-Mobile: any unlocked GSM phone or locked to T-mobile
Pre-paid: they lease from one of the above carriers. Follow whichever carrier rule applies.
Verizon: you must have a carrier phone. You can't bring another CDMA carrier's phone.
Sprint: see Verizon.
AT&T: any unlocked GSM or locked to AT&T.
T-Mobile: any unlocked GSM phone or locked to T-mobile
Pre-paid: they lease from one of the above carriers. Follow whichever carrier rule applies.
Last edited:
Hmmm
UK: 0,093,788 square miles, 064 million people
US: 3,537,110 square miles, 317 million people
So knowing that neither the US or UK has literally every square mile covered with phone service, "in general" US cell carriers have 37x more land to cover, while the potential customer base is only 5x more.
Yeah, there is definitely some disparity there.
But after seeing how expensive the price of gasoline is in the UK, or how many home Internet connections "down under" are capped (to the point people on here have to worry about if downloading an OS X update will put them over), I guess you can sum it up as "you win some and you lose some".
Carriers in Korea and Japan only need to worry about an area equivalent to the size of Indiana and Montana, respectively.
I live in the rural area and there are hardly any people. I'm glad that there is even cell phone coverage. The only thing I don't agree with is their smart phones requiring data and their minimum amount of data 2GB/30$ or their share plans being ridiculously high. Where I live, data isn't accessible, we can only make phone calls. Data without wifi is essentially useless and we are charged for it anyway.
2 Cities down there is LTE. It is surprising to see how fast LTE has expanded here.
2 Cities down there is LTE. It is surprising to see how fast LTE has expanded here.
They can be expensive in the UK too. I'm currently playing $85 for my contract which includes unlimited calls and texts and 8GB of LTE data. Then I have to pay another $20 on top for insurance. Well I opted to take the insurance, but still I'm paying over $100 a month for my mobile phone.
Hmmm
UK: 0,093,788 square miles, 064 million people
US: 3,537,110 square miles, 317 million people
So knowing that neither the US or UK has literally every square mile covered with phone service, "in general" US cell carriers have 37x more land to cover, while the potential customer base is only 5x more.
Yeah, there is definitely some disparity there.
But after seeing how expensive the price of gasoline is in the UK, or how many home Internet connections "down under" are capped (to the point people on here have to worry about if downloading an OS X update will put them over), I guess you can sum it up as "you win some and you lose some".
Totally irrelevant is the discussion is about cell phone plans.
How do you figure?
This thread is about the price of cell phone plans in the USA, compared to other countries.
The first part of that post talks about US cell phone companies have significantly more land to cover, but not a proportionally significant number of "extra customers" in that land area, compared to other countries.
The second part talks about prices of services and commodities in general vary greatly from country to country, so even if all conditions between US cell phone companies were the same as cell phone companies in other countries, it still likely there'd be a country where cell phone service was more expensive than in another.
Well that is why businesses exist after all.....as if its some evil thing.
----------
Edit: Ehh I had typed out a nice rebuttal listing various items that can be found cheaper in the good ole USofA.....then I realized, this pic says it all.
No where else I'd rather live.
Attachments
Well that is why businesses exist after all.....as if its some evil thing.
----------
Edit: Ehh I had typed out a nice rebuttal listing various items that can be found cheaper in the good ole USofA.....then I realized, this pic says it all.
No where else I'd rather live.
Yes yes
