Can you see me now?
- Thread starter Pokeabear
- Start date
Is there any linkage to the evidence of this study? Does it include the price for phones? Does it differentiate between 1GB transferred on a 3G network vs. a 4G (or even 5G)? Does it differentiate locale? There's a lot of variables in play here that your single tweet leaves undetailed. Just looking at the list though, I'd hypothesize that you are subsidizing first mover advantage to these markets as the most expensive markets on the list were first with 4G and are well on their way to 5G. Much of Europe is 3G outside of the largest population centers. So not sure I see any price gouging here.
But in the end, as is the best part of capitalism, you can always choose to not buy it or to buy a cheaper alternative.
But in the end, as is the best part of capitalism, you can always choose to not buy it or to buy a cheaper alternative.
I guess it's all about context. There are a ton of variables making a comparison difficult based solely on a list of $/GB
- Universal Service and coverage requirements in the US makes the cost rise as our country doesn't have the same population density as others.
- Same goes for infrastructure. Some of those countries are going to be using our old equipment and buy it cheap.
- Does anyone pay for phone/long distance service on their mobile phones these days? Is it baked into the data plans around the world as well?
- We really screwed the pooch when we started mobile services by bundling equipment and service and heavily discounting the upfront price of the phone. That's not true for other places and US carriers still can't seem to get off the practice.
@Pokeabear
Also didn't ask how was the average calculated? Is it total payments vs. total GBs used across all customers? Is it actual billing rates from the providers? Is it overage rates for those that exceed limits? How are flat-rate unlimited plans calculated?
Finally, and here is the big question: What was your expectation, and what is your solution? Are you willing to go back to 2G and 3G networks along with flip phones so you can achieve India's 26 cent rate? Are you willing to accept call failures, no 911 access, and limited network coverage? Do you think government should just take over phone service for everyone (socialism in action) so its fairly priced and all profit (and thus motive to innovate) is eliminated? Or is this another random tweet copy with zero intellectual thought behind it (as is unfortunately your norm)?
Also didn't ask how was the average calculated? Is it total payments vs. total GBs used across all customers? Is it actual billing rates from the providers? Is it overage rates for those that exceed limits? How are flat-rate unlimited plans calculated?
Finally, and here is the big question: What was your expectation, and what is your solution? Are you willing to go back to 2G and 3G networks along with flip phones so you can achieve India's 26 cent rate? Are you willing to accept call failures, no 911 access, and limited network coverage? Do you think government should just take over phone service for everyone (socialism in action) so its fairly priced and all profit (and thus motive to innovate) is eliminated? Or is this another random tweet copy with zero intellectual thought behind it (as is unfortunately your norm)?
This is definitely an opinion but talk about assuming. Care to link your sources? On the what to do aspect of your screed, I’d say some anti trust lawsuits and reversal or invalidation of some mergers. We need more completion not less.
Sources for what? I asked questions, not state facts (outside of you cut'n'pasting twitter, which is a #fact). You linked a statement, bitched about price gouging, and have yet to actually provide any supporting evidence which is all I asked for.
UK among countries with priciest mobile data plans in Europe
Ranking of 230 countries placed UK 136th, with India as cheapest country
Rupert JonesMon 4 Mar 2019 19.01 EST
The UK is one of the priciest countries in Europe for mobile phone data, with Britons typically paying almost six times more than their counterparts in Finland, according to a new study.
Some may also be surprised to see that the top 10 cheapest countries in the world include the likes of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Rwanda and Sudan.
The analysis of mobile data plans in 230 countries revealed that the UK ranked a “disappointing” 136th when the cost of one gigabyte (1GB) of mobile data was looked at.
The typical UK cost was $6.66 (£5.15 before conversion to US dollars), which compares with $1.16 in Finland, $1.73 in Italy, $1.88 in Austria and $2.99 in France. However, several major European countries were more expensive than the UK, including Germany ($6.96), the Netherlands ($7.99) and Belgium ($12.30).
India is home to the world’s cheapest mobile data plans, with 1GB of data costing an average of $0.26, while the most expensive place is Zimbabwe, where the typical cost is $75.20 – 289 times as much.
The US is one of the costliest developed nations, coming in a lowly 182nd place, with an average 1GB costing $12.37. The survey of costs was conducted by Cable.co.uk, a broadband, TV and phone website that analysed more than 6,000 mobile data plans.
Dan Howdle, an analyst at the website, said:“When looking at the UK compared to our European and EU counterparts, it’s disappointing to see the UK among the most expensive countries for mobile data. Despite a healthy UK marketplace, our study has uncovered that EU nations such as Finland, Poland, Denmark, Italy, Austria and France pay a fraction of what we pay in the UK for similar data usage.”
He added: “It will be interesting to see how our position is affected post-Brexit.”
Among the countries propping up the bottom of the table were Greece, which was in 224th place, with a typical cost of just over $32, and three British overseas territories: Bermuda, Falkland Islands and Saint Helena (between $37 and $55).
Ten of the top 20 cheapest countries are in Asia, with Sri Lanka, Mongolia and Myanmar joining India in the top 10. Fifth- and sixth-cheapest were Rwanda and Sudan ($0.56 and $0.68 respectively).
Prices were recorded in the advertised currency, then converted to US dollars for comparison purposes, which means the data is affected by exchange rate fluctuations.
Howdle said some of the cheapest countries had excellent mobile and fixed broadband infrastructure, while others had low prices dictated by their economy, as that was what people could afford.
The typical cost of 1GB of mobile data
1 India $0.26
2 Kyrgyzstan $0.27
3 Kazakhstan $0.49
4 Ukraine $0.51
5 Rwanda $0.56
6 Sudan $0.68
7 Sri Lanka $0.78
8 Mongolia $0.82
9 Myanmar $0.87
10 DRC $0.88
14 Finland $1.16
136 UK $6.66
182 United States $12.37
230 Zimbabwe $75.20
Source: Cable.co.uk
Cable.co.uk has released data which suggests the UK is 136th in the world for affordability when it comes to mobile data plans.
Data is increasingly running our lives and while many might feel they have struck the right balance between quantity and affordability this survey suggests otherwise. After comparing 6,313 mobile data plans in 230 countries, the UK ranks at 136 worldwide, and in the bottom half of the table for Europe.
“When looking at the UK compared to our European and EU counterparts, it’s disappointing to see the UK among the most expensive countries for mobile data,” said Dan Howdle of Cable.co.uk.
“Despite a healthy UK marketplace, our study has uncovered that EU nations such as Finland, Poland, Denmark, Italy, Austria and France pay a fraction of what we pay in the UK for similar data usage. It will be interesting to see how our position is affected post-Brexit.”
On average, UK consumers are currently paying £4.97 per GB a month ($6.42), with the lowest being £0.7 and the most expensive as high as £32 per GB a month. What is worth taking into account is the survey only measured SIM-only plans, excluding the complicated task of factoring in the price of a subsidized device. But how does this compare to other countries?
India was the cheapest worldwide, with a GB costing only $0.26 per month, though all of the telcos are struggling to remain profitable. Asian countries take up 50% of the top 20 in fact. Finland was the cheapest in Europe, $1.16 per GB a month, while across the pond, US consumers are paying $12.37 per GB a month and the Canadians came out at $12.02. The global average was $8.53.
As there haven’t been riots on the streets, it does seem most consumers are relatively content with the price they are paying. Admittedly in some cases it is extortionately expensive, something which should be addressed, but many of the markets are pricing plans in-line with the relative wealth of the nation.
That said, there is a wide chasm between the most and least expensive plans more often than not. This suggests consumers are not being savvy enough when purchasing mobile contracts in the first place, are not aware of other deals which are available or do not believe there is value in changing provider. It may be easy to blame the telcos for the high-price of data, but this can be a lazy route to take.
Cable.co.uk and other consumer groups might use this data to punish telcos, we suspect the increased price in the UK is more to do with consumers not being savvy enough. After years as a Vodafone customer, your correspondent switched to Giffgaff and a data plan which was much more generous. Admittedly a subsidized phone is not included in the deal, but in paying £1.33 per GB ($1.75), the monthly bill is substantially lower than what Vodafone was offering, or what Cable.co.uk have identified as the monthly average in the UK.
We believe the consumer is not blameless. For example, a now-available Vodafone 24-month contract with a Huawei Mate 20 Pro would cost £38 per month. Adding in the upfront cost of £179, the total would be £3.03 per GB a month. This is still below the average quoted by Cable.co.uk and would still be lower if the cost of the handset was factored into the equation.
Cable.co.uk has only taken into account tariffs which are currently available to consumers, therefore removing data points from legacy and on-going tariffs which might have thrown the averages, but the availability of cheaper contracts suggests some of the blame has to be taken by the consumer.
The price of tariffs are generally relative to the market which they are in. In the UK, we are relatively lucky due to competition keeping the price of data down (in comparison to the geographically vast markets such as the US) but squeeze too tight and the telcos don’t have enough to invest in networks in a commercially viable fashion, or they prioritise markets which are more profitable. Both would impact experience and the latter would create a digital divide.
While your correspondent cannot comment on other markets, being based in the UK, the outcome of this survey seems to be relatively clear. If you’re not happy with the price of your tariff, move, as there are cheaper options on the market.
Like what we've got to say? Click here to sign up for our daily newsletter!
Tags: 4G, Cable.co.uk, data, tariffs, UK
I guess the presumption is that these costs, as nebulously calculated as they are, are simply a function of prices charged by the service providers?
Might want to factor in taxes and fees assessed by the governments in these countries before concluding too much about the overall costs.
Might want to factor in taxes and fees assessed by the governments in these countries before concluding too much about the overall costs.
I would advise that you move to India to take advantage of the non-gouging low rates!
Was that so hard? This is what I wanted. The source for your position. It looks like it simply looks at plan rates and takes zero account for infrastructure differences, regulatory differences, network coverage, etc. Just look at the US map alone: Rates range from $1.50 to $60.53 with a $12 average. In the UK, plans range from $.26 to $56 dollars. Seems like capitalism is working as expected. There are cheaper options available with lesser services, while having options for greater services if you are willing to pay for it. This looks like much ado about nothing.
First, excellent subject. It should be one that we can have without painting each other in partisan boxes. We should at least give it a shot.
I don't know how the UK website arrived at their $/GB. If it's MRSP for a gig in a plan, it's significantly too high. If they are guessing the cost for what US consumers actually use (metered cost including spoilage) then it's possibly more reasonable estimate but I'd like to know how they got their data.
We're going to be on the more expensive side in the US just because of our geography/population density profiles, and FCC requirements that you must provide coverage to a very high percentage of your landmass. We're a big country and a lot of the space isn't populated by many people yet you still have to provide coverage per your license requirements. And you have to do it via Universal Service -- which is like postage stamps. People in populated areas pay more than their fair share and people in rural areas don't pay nearly enough when it comes to the cost of providing services rendered. Universal service is a great thing, but it does drive up cost.
I don't know how the UK website arrived at their $/GB. If it's MRSP for a gig in a plan, it's significantly too high. If they are guessing the cost for what US consumers actually use (metered cost including spoilage) then it's possibly more reasonable estimate but I'd like to know how they got their data.
We're going to be on the more expensive side in the US just because of our geography/population density profiles, and FCC requirements that you must provide coverage to a very high percentage of your landmass. We're a big country and a lot of the space isn't populated by many people yet you still have to provide coverage per your license requirements. And you have to do it via Universal Service -- which is like postage stamps. People in populated areas pay more than their fair share and people in rural areas don't pay nearly enough when it comes to the cost of providing services rendered. Universal service is a great thing, but it does drive up cost.
We actually aren't. While our 'average' is higher than most, we have plans that are competitive as well based on that study. The study didn't indicate in the story (or the link) how the averages were calculated, and there were a lot of missing details, but based on what I saw, it looked pretty reasonable. Countries that have the best coverage at the fastest speeds had the highest costs (as expected). Countries with few options were cheaper but lacked variety or choice of plans, or have networks that are significantly inferior (although the latter wasn't highlighted by the story - which was basically a sophomore level rant about people in the UK paying a premium vs. the world for cellular data).
Thank you, very interesting points you have made. I still feel like we are being taken advantage of here in The US. It may just be that paychecks are not meeting inflation rates and so everything is more expensive in relation to what we have to spend.
I went and found their data-set for their story. They are dumb-asses.
They went on the internet and looked up plans offered by wireless companies. In the US, this gave them 32 plans which they did a simple average based on published plans.
So your plan where you get 20GB for $100 (or $5/GB and has 100 million customers on it) gets the exact same weighting as your great-grandma's security plan that doesn't include any data and costs $60/month which has 10k plan subscribers.
Do you even know how much you spend per GB? Have you shopped around? T-Mobile made $550M on $10.8B in revenue (or a 5% margin). Sprint made $200M on $8B in revenue (1% margin). Verizon made $1.9B on $34B in revenue (5% margin). Obviously network data isn't the only driver of revenue for these companies (although I avoided AT&T explicitly due to their more diverse nature of revenue), but 5% net margins for companies doesn't seem like that much and certainly don't scream price gouging.
Oh I’m not bitching about myself, I don’t pay my bills personally Lol, I have accountants for that kind of stuff. I thought it might be an Everyman issue. It looks to mostly be an issue with Pokeabear.
