I wonder how population density effects price for cellular carriers. One reason wireless is expensive in the US, to my knowledge, is because much of the surface

I wonder how population density effects price for cellular carriers. One reason wireless is expensive in the US, to my knowledge, is because much of the surface area is sparsely populated with customers requiring more wireless tower infrastructure to cover fewer people (then costs are spread across most the national or regional customer base). In dense cities, I imagine towers can theoretically serve more people. Obviously you reach a saturation point where a tower can only serve so many people and has to be expanded but I suspect this lowers infrastructure costs. One would have to be able to handle larger "burst" demands in a densely populated area though. On top of that, I'm not familiar with topography of India, but certain areas in the US are mountainous and as a result, require even more towers to provide coverage (for typically sparse populations). In dense cities where you have near line of sight, I imagine that increases range reducing infrastructure demands some (though this constraint may be moot based on typical tower saturation). In India I would expect cheaper prices based on that line of reason, though I may be missing something critical (I'm no telecom expert).