How Much Should Broadband Cost?

An anonymous reader writes "The difference in cost between broadband options seems to be the primary motivator for consumer spending, reports News.com. Frugal consumers are opting for the lower-priced DSL options, while those with more money to spend on services are opting for cable modems." From the article: "A year-and-a-half ago, pricing of DSL and cable modem service was roughly the same. But over the past year, the phone companies have launched an aggressive assault by dropping prices. At the end of 2005, the average price of DSL service was about $32 per month, roughly $9 less than cable, according to research firm IDC. AT&T has twice lowered the price of its DSL service and now offers its 1.5Mbps service for $12.99 for the first year."

Comments

not really cheaper

[aichpvee]

"At the end of 2005, the average price of DSL service was about $32 per month, roughly $9 less than cable, according to research firm IDC."

DSL is still more expensive than cable unless you have a landline already. Home telephone service is around 40$/month here, which would make DSL (assuming I could get 32$/month anyway, which seems low) that would put me at over 70$. Compared to cable which is under 60$ and comes with "free" basic cable, since there's no way not to pay for that too.

I've already got a cellphone and don't have any use for a landline. Maybe if the DSL providers were actually any better than comcast (local cable monopoly), but until they are it's not worth the extra cash.

age discrepancy

[Triv]

For the most part, young people get cable and older people get dsl. Why? Because young people tend to have cell phones and no landlines in their homes, so factoring in the cost of maintaining a phone line that nobody'll use bumps the price way up.

Why cable companies haven't changed their marketing to reflect this, I have no idea. Behind the times, I guess.

--triv