4 ms·
I disagree about that lack of competition: Finland was actually a pioneer in deregulation of telecom services in 1980's-1990's and that was a partial reason for
by ptaipale 10y ago
I disagree about that lack of competition: Finland was actually a pioneer in deregulation of telecom services in 1980's-1990's and that was a partial reason for the great success of Nokia since that. The company learned how to deal with operators that are competing on a market. Deregulation followed later in many European countries and throughout the world.
There are three physical countrywide LTE/3G/GSM networks in Finland: Telia/Sonera, Elisa and DNA. They then carry some MVNOs so there are more places where you can actually buy a SIM card than just these three.
Most people buy their phone here separately from the operator contract, so there are much fewer contract phones than e.g. in the U.S. Thus there is competition for phone sales, and competition for operator contracts, separately.
Telia/Sonera is the former state monopoly, Elisa grew out of Helsinki telephone association/company, and DNA is a merger of small countryside operators. Sonera has the best coverage throughout the country, DNA curiously enough has the best coverage in urban areas.
Of course, we can still always say that there is not enough competition between operators, as their prices tend to converge. Consumer advocates usually have only two kinds of messages: either all prices are nearly the same ("competition is not working!") or there are large disparities in prices ("competition is not working!").
- dogma1138 10y agoDisagree about what exactly? if only 3 cellular providers is competition then it's the same case for most countries. Oddly enough many countries somehow seem to devolve to the magic number of "3" which is usually the one old state run company, the "1990's/1980's" deregulation one, and the newer one which is also in many countries a consortium of several 2nd wave players that had to consolidate to survive. Clearly there are some other forces driving cellular communication in Finland other than only having 3 carriers.
- nordify 10y ago> Clearly there are some other forces driving cellular communication in Finland other than only having 3 carriers. The difference is that Finland has effective competition, whereas other countries have nominal competition. A good and effective regulative authority has definitely helped, but the fact that Finnish operators actually both invest and compete makes for all the difference.
- dogma1138 10y agoAgain that is easy to say but it is meaningless unless there are quantifiable metrics by which you can prove that. If you look at the actual coverage map Finland isn't considerably better than most countries including the US, 4G+ is available in a few hotspots only, and the LTE and 3G coverage is pretty similar. The 4G+ 300mbit plans from Elisa cost 60 Euros a month without a device, I haven't seen anything so far that is that unusual.
- nordify 10y ago> Again that is easy to say but it is meaningless unless there are quantifiable metrics by which you can prove that. Consumer prices. Geographical coverage. Unlimited and unrestricted usage. > If you look at the actual coverage map Finland isn't considerably better than most countries including the US, 4G+ is available in a few hotspots only, and the LTE and 3G coverage is pretty similar. How did you perform this comparison? I find this claim very unlikely to be correct. > The 4G+ 300mbit plans from Elisa cost 60 Euros a month without a device, I haven't seen anything so far that is that unusual This is incorrect. DNA 300M plan is 30€ per month. Elisa and Sonera are 50€ Per month. All plans without a contract, quotas or limits. 300M are premium flagship plans with a premium price. 100M plan are like 15€. Starter plans with 50 minutes of talk time and 0,25 Mbps of uncapped, unlimited and unrestricted usage are free on Sonera's network. What other country comes even close?