4 ms·
Well, that still does make a very bad argument, exactly because it is a false assumption. But aside from stating the obvious: I would actually be interested if
by btschaegg 9y ago
Well, that still does make a very bad argument, exactly because it is a false assumption.
But aside from stating the obvious: I would actually be interested if there is a country where a lack of competing ISPs is not the status quo. And if there is, what the reason for that might be. If there is, I'd assume it would have to do with that country treating network infrastructure the same as roads and allowing small companies to access it.
- noncoml 9y agoI think UK has pretty healthy competition between ISPs.
- martinmunk 9y agoDenmark have reasonable competition. Exactly for the reason you assumed. A small ISP just rents the cabel.
- shakna 9y agoWell, despite the appalling infrastructure in Australia, I had a choice of: * Exetel * Optus * Vodafone * Dodo * iiNet (the only one who provides fibre here) * Telstra At every residence I've occupied. 3 or more seems to the national norm. So far as I understand it, it's common for providers to rent their architecture to other providers, so long as they are using similar pricing. (The NBN is slightly different as the mostly-Telstra-controlled NBNCo gets to set minimum prices for some reason. It results in usually-identical pricing.)