Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Broadband ISPs Expect Price Cuts

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the too-cheap-to-meter dept.

prostoalex writes "US broadband providers are trying to avoid the price wars, but the cost of DSL and cable hookups is still headed down with major promotions from players like Comcast and Yahoo/SBC. Currently there are 22 million US subscribers, 2 million of which subscribed during the past three months. It looks like the prices for broadband Internet are headed towards $20-30/month range, although most operators prefer to lock you into a yearly contract or provide special price for the first several months only."

7 of 284 comments (clear)

  1. They must be joking... by Frisky070802 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I use Cablevision's Optimum Online at home. The performance ain't bad, but the price is anything but optimal. It started at $30/month, increased to $40 after a few months, and then to $45. This is in keeping with the full menu of Cablevision services, since with my digital cable package, for a few TVs, I pay over $120/month.

    My employer subsidizes up to $30/month for online access, so the cable internet cost isn't as painful as it otherwise would be. But the idea that price wars with the CLECs would drive cable internet prices down seems ludicrous, at least in this market (NJ).

    Heck, considering that when I moved to my current house (end of 1998), Cablevision promised broadband within 6 months, and kept making that promise every few months for 2 years, I was grateful to have broadband in the first place! And that's what they must count on. Competition from another cable company, if not Verizon, would be nice. But the market tanked just as a competitor was considering jumping in.

    --
    Mencken had it right. So glad that's old news.
    1. Re:They must be joking... by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting
      They're both overpriced for what you get? Let's say that upstream is worth no more and no less than upstream. Assuming you live in an urban area, you might be able to get a full T1 for $600/mo. (I am aware that some people get it cheaper, and that in some places no one gets it that cheap. Can we move on?) So let's say that means that 1.5Mbps is worth $300. You can get 1.1Mbps SDSL for about $200/mo, or you can get 1.5Mbps/128 (or 256 sometimes) ADSL for $30 to $50, or you can get 1.5Mbps/256 cable for $50-$65. Each of these things is clearly a "better deal" than the T1. Now granted a full T usually comes with a /24 or so, though they're on loan, you don't own them, so their actual value is debatable. You have to pay a little extra for business class services to get static IPs on typical broadband connections, and they don't have as many of them, you typically get five usable addresses or so. You can't multihome and you don't get BGP advertisements in that price either. So maybe the actual value is more like half what the T1's is per unit of traffic. So, it's only worth a bit over $300 by that comparison, and you're getting it for $100?

      You can differ in opinion but the fact is that the connections keep getting faster, and they often get cheaper. They seldom go up in price. I should not need to remind you that broadband is a lot cheaper than using tymnet or compuserver back in the day, and that was at modem speeds.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  2. Thats the standard price in canada in sme currency by j_dot_bomb · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Its hard to figure out what has caused the difference. Is there more competition here ? I read once about a price cap. The lack of competition in the US may appear to be the most liekly answer.

  3. Instead it goes up for us... by rrace · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Here in good ole Canada, the price for cable here is around 50 bucks, and if SOCAN have their way it will probably go up even more. Instead of going forward we are going backward and soon broadband will not be accessible to everyone. Sad really.

  4. I hope it applies to business rates too! by badfrog · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I decided needed high upload rates, so I'm shelling out ~$200/month for business cable. There's no clause against servers, and I get the super-secret phone number where a REAL PERSON actually answers. But it also is quite painful to the toy budget.

  5. I hope... by musingmelpomene · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I hope they manage to continue developing the infrastructure for the technology. Otherwise, we're going to end up with so many cable modems per node that there won't be appreciable speed differences between cable and dialup during peak usage times. If the demand increases, but they refuse to continue to create infrastructure due to the new, lower pricing, people will be faced with higher-than-dialup fees for not much more real speed.

  6. central kentucky... by ecalkin · · Score: 3, Interesting

    i have dsl through a local company that does dsl and dialup. $60/month. this included 4 static addresses.

    bell was $50 for 1 dynamic address and (i think) $129 for 1 static. and way out of control for more than one static ip.

    adelphia (cabletv) was $50 for 1 dynamic, $150 for 1 static address and *another* $150 if you needed another (one address per cable!)

    bell jumped out with teeth and claws a short time ago. i had a (bell) customer with 5 regular lines and they were paying 225/month. bell offered them 5 lines and dsl for 195/month. something smells here, but i asked all the questions. it will be interesting to see if they can maintain a reasonable data rate...

    *i* think they (bell) were afraid of adelphia and not the 'other' dsl providers. i think also it's a hook to keep customers on land lines. ya gotta have copper (or fiber) to have dsl. this may also be to keep people from moving that number to cell phone.

    eric

    this ought to be interesting.