5 ms·

I know this has come up before, but since the gulf in cost is so stark I thought I'd mention it again. In the UK I just signed up to a £20/month VDSL2 broadband

by ssl232 4y ago

I know this has come up before, but since the gulf in cost is so stark I thought I'd mention it again. In the UK I just signed up to a £20/month VDSL2 broadband service (approx 65 Mbps, FTTC, unmetered), rolling monthly contract, and £65 up front. The contract guarantees at least around 50 Mbps or they automatically pay compensation. $100/month seems pretty crazy to me. I know the lack of competition and widespread collusion is bad in the US amongst cable companies, but you saying people typically pay 5x more for what seems like similar service to what I'm getting is really eye-opening. Apart from Virgin Media most companies share the OpenReach network that's sort of publicly funded (ish). Yet, the UK isn't exactly known for investing well in public services so I'm still surprised at the gulf in cost.

ghaff 4y ago
We're talking about cable TV content. Satellite (DirecTV) costs about the same. But, yes, now that I only have Internet from my cable provider, I also pay about $100/month for that.
linker3000 4y ago
Similar speeds, about £24/mo for the FTTC, with bundled phone (pay as you go) and one static IP. SIM only Mobile phone with same provider with unlimited calls and 7GB data for just under £10/mo.
comfypotato 4y ago
There’s a lot of variation in the US. I’m in a 600k city and an area with some kind of COVID program that pays my $20.00 bill. I’m not paying anything for a very reliable 35 mbps.
cassianoleal 4y ago
I'm paying £43/month for 1Gbps symmetrical with Hyperoptic. My current bottleneck is the otherwise very capable Turris Omnia that I use as a router.
reaperducer 4y ago
In the UK I just signed up to a £20/month VDSL2 broadband service Good for you. But I wrote about cable television service, not about internet service. Two different things.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
msbarnett 4y ago
Looking at the exchange rate, I’m paying ~£65/month for 1Gbps unlimited fiber in Canada, which is not exactly known for its cheap internet. £20 a month for only 65Mbps seems not great to be honest.
- Dayshine 4y ago
  Is £500/y really worth a difference you'll rarely notice? Streaming needs 20Mbps max, so it's only large downloads like games which will take an hour or two. The savings pay for a high end phone every year, or a complete desktop upgrade every other year.
  - msbarnett 4y ago
    I do a heck of a lot more with my internet connection than just streaming – there was a night-and-day improvement when stepping up from my previous 150 Mbps coax connection. It’s not just “large game downloads”, but moving many gigs of data to remote servers daily as part of my job while both my wife and I are in video calls, while also etc etc. Fast symmetrical fiber is a godsend. But whether or not these speeds would be meaningfully useful to you personally, the real observation here is just that GP is paying ~4.7x as much on a Megabit per second per month basis – your 20Mbps “I just stream” connection should cost hardly anything, a bad deal however you slice it. (As an aside: yearly phone replacement?? I buy hardware to last on a much longer timeframe, so it more than balances out) edit: back of the envelope network stat math – the 7.5TB I moved last month (up+down) would have completely saturated a 20Mbps connection for more than the month (34 consecutive days), assuming it was symmetrical (which a connection like that probably isn’t).
    - crtasm 4y ago
      Most of that £20 goes to cover the telephone line rental, it's not directly comparable to prices for fiber.
      - msbarnett 4y ago
        The details of why the bad deal is bad are good color, but don’t really change that it’s not a great deal.
antihero 4y ago
London it’s about £60/mo for 1000/50Mbps DOCSIS from Virgin Media but I think the smaller FTTH companies that require an enabled property are cheaper.
121789 4y ago
US is a big place. I'm paying $75 for unlimited 1G fiber where I live, and it is not a cheap place in general. I have family living in cheaper places paying <$30 for 50-100Mbps cable broadband. I have other family in the suburbs paying like $300 for decent internet and cable TV, getting ripped off, but essentially not caring because they don't want to deal with changing anything.
wdb 4y ago
Internet sucks in London, UK, yet to get 6.5mb/s or so called ‘Fibre’ internet. It’s 2022 and you can’t get a 200-500mbit plan in Zone 1 of London without going for a business fibre plan and pay a lots of money for digging if you don’t live in some apartment building. Even g.network and Hyperoptic have been digging around my house but my Mews house won’t get connected even while everyone in the Mews indicated interest
somedudetbh 4y ago
The person you're responding to isn't talking about internet service, they're talking about premium sports video packages like NFL Sunday Ticket. > I know this has come up before, but since the gulf in cost is so stark I thought I'd mention it again. I think you might be remembering conversations about mobile service or something. I live in the US and my gigabit fiber (to my house) is fifty bucks a month. The US is a big place.
kevin_thibedeau 4y ago
The problem in the US is that there is now a $30 federal subsidy for internet. This is ostensibly to support low income people but the effect is that it sets a minimum price anchor. Very few ISPs offer a cheap, low bitrate plan despite few people really needing to have multi-100Mbit service.

by ssl232 4y ago

ghaff 4y ago

We're talking about cable TV content. Satellite (DirecTV) costs about the same. But, yes, now that I only have Internet from my cable provider, I also pay about $100/month for that.

linker3000 4y ago

Similar speeds, about £24/mo for the FTTC, with bundled phone (pay as you go) and one static IP. SIM only Mobile phone with same provider with unlimited calls and 7GB data for just under £10/mo.

comfypotato 4y ago

There’s a lot of variation in the US. I’m in a 600k city and an area with some kind of COVID program that pays my $20.00 bill. I’m not paying anything for a very reliable 35 mbps.

cassianoleal 4y ago

I'm paying £43/month for 1Gbps symmetrical with Hyperoptic. My current bottleneck is the otherwise very capable Turris Omnia that I use as a router.

reaperducer 4y ago

In the UK I just signed up to a £20/month VDSL2 broadband service Good for you. But I wrote about cable television service, not about internet service. Two different things.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

msbarnett 4y ago

Looking at the exchange rate, I’m paying ~£65/month for 1Gbps unlimited fiber in Canada, which is not exactly known for its cheap internet. £20 a month for only 65Mbps seems not great to be honest.

Dayshine 4y ago
Is £500/y really worth a difference you'll rarely notice? Streaming needs 20Mbps max, so it's only large downloads like games which will take an hour or two. The savings pay for a high end phone every year, or a complete desktop upgrade every other year.
- msbarnett 4y ago
  I do a heck of a lot more with my internet connection than just streaming – there was a night-and-day improvement when stepping up from my previous 150 Mbps coax connection. It’s not just “large game downloads”, but moving many gigs of data to remote servers daily as part of my job while both my wife and I are in video calls, while also etc etc. Fast symmetrical fiber is a godsend. But whether or not these speeds would be meaningfully useful to you personally, the real observation here is just that GP is paying ~4.7x as much on a Megabit per second per month basis – your 20Mbps “I just stream” connection should cost hardly anything, a bad deal however you slice it. (As an aside: yearly phone replacement?? I buy hardware to last on a much longer timeframe, so it more than balances out) edit: back of the envelope network stat math – the 7.5TB I moved last month (up+down) would have completely saturated a 20Mbps connection for more than the month (34 consecutive days), assuming it was symmetrical (which a connection like that probably isn’t).
  - crtasm 4y ago
    Most of that £20 goes to cover the telephone line rental, it's not directly comparable to prices for fiber.
    - msbarnett 4y ago
      The details of why the bad deal is bad are good color, but don’t really change that it’s not a great deal.

antihero 4y ago

London it’s about £60/mo for 1000/50Mbps DOCSIS from Virgin Media but I think the smaller FTTH companies that require an enabled property are cheaper.

121789 4y ago

US is a big place. I'm paying $75 for unlimited 1G fiber where I live, and it is not a cheap place in general. I have family living in cheaper places paying <$30 for 50-100Mbps cable broadband. I have other family in the suburbs paying like $300 for decent internet and cable TV, getting ripped off, but essentially not caring because they don't want to deal with changing anything.

wdb 4y ago

Internet sucks in London, UK, yet to get 6.5mb/s or so called ‘Fibre’ internet. It’s 2022 and you can’t get a 200-500mbit plan in Zone 1 of London without going for a business fibre plan and pay a lots of money for digging if you don’t live in some apartment building. Even g.network and Hyperoptic have been digging around my house but my Mews house won’t get connected even while everyone in the Mews indicated interest

somedudetbh 4y ago

The person you're responding to isn't talking about internet service, they're talking about premium sports video packages like NFL Sunday Ticket. > I know this has come up before, but since the gulf in cost is so stark I thought I'd mention it again. I think you might be remembering conversations about mobile service or something. I live in the US and my gigabit fiber (to my house) is fifty bucks a month. The US is a big place.

kevin_thibedeau 4y ago

The problem in the US is that there is now a $30 federal subsidy for internet. This is ostensibly to support low income people but the effect is that it sets a minimum price anchor. Very few ISPs offer a cheap, low bitrate plan despite few people really needing to have multi-100Mbit service.