  RobIn Deo speramus.Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:3 | Unfair comparsion.. It's unfair to compare Europe to the U.S. There's no way that a MSO in the U.S. could offer all that for $38 USD. It's just not possible. TV networks (ahem ESPN) want an arm and a leg and refuse to negotiate (i.e. NFL and Comcast dispute).
--
CheckSite.us | YourIP.US | |
|
 | | | Re: Unfair comparsion.. BULL SHIT!!! | |
|
| |  maartenaElmoPremium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:1 | Re: Unfair comparsion.. said by anony101 :
BULL SHIT!!!
There are some truths here though. If you buy a satellite dish in Europe, you can receive 300 free to air channels, in french, german, italian, spanish.... the only ones that are actually decoded are the English channels. You can get the german dubbed Law & Order for free, but not the one in its English original voices.
Those 120 channels in France, most likely only have 10 English channels, 80+ in French obviously, and then some in other languages from neighnoring countries and arabic minorities.
American TV channels are much, much more expensive to place on cable networks. And satellite for that matter.
Internet is a different story however..... it can be, and should be cheaper in the US. | |
|
| | |
| | | We get all the same US stations in Europe too and for that matter all over the world. So what makes the US so different? Greed and Incompetence. | |
|
| | RobIn Deo speramus.Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:3 | Re: Unfair comparsion.. said by anony101 :
We get all the same US stations in Europe too and for that matter all over the world. So what makes the US so different? Greed and Incompetence.
Right, and not from the MSO's, but from the TV networks. | |
|
| | | | | Re: Unfair comparsion.. said by Rob:said by anony101 :
We get all the same US stations in Europe too and for that matter all over the world. So what makes the US so different? Greed and Incompetence.
Right, and not from the MSO's, but from the TV networks. Well the Cable company charges $25 for OVER THE AIR CHANNELS that are free plus C-span and add channels. I would not put all the blame on all the TV networks so fast. | |
|
| | | | RobIn Deo speramus.Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:3 | Re: Unfair comparsion.. said by Aozora:said by Rob:said by anony101 :
We get all the same US stations in Europe too and for that matter all over the world. So what makes the US so different? Greed and Incompetence.
Right, and not from the MSO's, but from the TV networks. Well the Cable company charges $25 for OVER THE AIR CHANNELS that are free plus C-span and add channels. I would not put all the blame on all the TV networks so fast. Do you think it's free for them to provide you with those OTA channels? | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: Unfair comparsion.. The Cablecos do NOT get the OTA channels for Free. They have to PAY the locals channels a fee. The locals see it as the cable making money from THEIR (?) product so they pay a retransmission type fee.
And my Cableco just spent 4 months negotiating with them to get the ok and how much they were going to pay for the ok to rebroadcast the High Def local stuff.
But I will tell you if you have an OTA antenna...the HD stufff is WOW. Much better than cable or sat. | |
|
| | | | European gov'ts support their networks. So it's cheaper for broadcasters to pick up their signal. | |
|
| | Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| said by anony101 :
We get all the same US stations in Europe too and for that matter all over the world. So what makes the US so different? Greed and Incompetence.
although the ILECs are certainly greedy, it's not incompetence that has U.S. broadband f'd up - the U.S. govt (including FCC) has very competently executed their ideologically driven plan to competely deregulate the broadband industry.
because they have been very successful, there is virtually no competition in the U.S. and we pay very high prices for the services we get compared to other developed countries.
So, in this case the govt has not been incompetent - they have achieved what they set out to accomplish, screwing consumers the whole way. | |
|
| | | Gogo1
join:2004-05-27
Brooklyn, NY
3 edits | Re: Unfair comparsion.. quote:
U.S. broadband f'd up - the U.S. govt (including FCC) has very competently executed their ideologically driven plan to competely deregulate the broadband industry.
because they have been very successful, there is virtually no competition in the U.S.
Really? Deregulation causes a lack of competition?
quote:
and we pay very high prices for the services we get compared to other developed countries.
Its funny, most people at DSLR probably support socialism and intervention in the labor industry. They probably think unions are great and that employers should pay an artificially higher price for labor than the free market would dictate.
Suddenly though, when it comes to their consumption, when it comes to things they have to pay for, they are all for the free market and the low prices competition brings.
quote:
they have achieved what they set out to accomplish, screwing consumers the whole way.
I agree. But thats not because of the free market or deregulation. Its because of government intervention and rules distorting the market. Only a few are allowed to enter the market and permission depends on which politicians pockets you fill, and whether you fill them enough. Then if you do, in return you get market conditions favorable for squeezing the consumer.
If the market was truly free you would pay the price broadband is worth. It would be impossible for the price to be anything else.
This is not rocket science. You Americans are deluded if you think you live in anything resembling a free market economy. You think Bush and the Republicans of this decade are free marketeers? Why dont you open your eyes and actually see whats going on. They are just as corrupt and socialist as the left. These people are *terrified* of the free market. If they didnt have their powers to create rules and intervene in the market, there wouldnt be such opportunity for their corruption and there wouldnt be the inefficiencies and artificial prices (boom/bust cycles) that this intervention brings for them to exploit. They would have to accept being paid the fair price that their contribution to the economy is actually worth. Which is not much. | |
|
| | | |  JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD | Re: Unfair comparsion.. said by Gogo1:...Its because of government intervention and rules distorting the market. Only a few are allowed to enter the market and permission depends on which politicians pockets you fill, and whether you fill them enough.... That's simply not true. It's against federal law for the local government to deny a franchise application. | |
|
| |  baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI
 ·Comcast
| Actually, he is completely right. Everyone blames the cable companies for higher rates, but you can really thank most of the sports networks. If ESPN buys a game from the NFL, and then they resort to showing it on ESPN2, ESPNClassic, or any of theit 15 channel knockoffs, then says to the cable company "well you have to pay me for this station to get this game".
The Big Ten network did that too, as has the Yankee's sports network, and the NFL network. | |
|
| | | | | Re: Unfair comparsion.. That's why I wish I could just DROP ALL SPORTS CHANNELS FROM MY LINEUP. I don't like them, I don't watch them, and I certainly don't want to PAY for them. | |
|
| | | |  RRMANPremium
join:2007-04-02
Cleveland, OH | Re: Unfair comparsion.. I don't want to pay for all the drama crap but I bite the bullet knowing it is part of the package. Live with it or buy rabbit ears | |
|
| | |  DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | They could say no. | |
|
| | maartenaElmoPremium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:1 | said by anony101 :
We get all the same US stations in Europe too and for that matter all over the world. So what makes the US so different? Greed and Incompetence.
The major difference is that the cable and telco companies in Europe have received BILLIONS in subsidies from their respective governments to make sure that the greater majority of homes were cabled and/or had high speed internet access available to them.
US telco's and cable companies haven't gotten a penny from governments, and if they have it does not compare to the amounts they have received in European countries. | |
|
| | | | | Re: Unfair comparsion.. You're kidding right??? I don't know about cable but telcos have received larger amounts of subsidies than all of europe put together. | |
|
| | | | RRMANPremium
join:2007-04-02
Cleveland, OH | Re: Unfair comparsion.. I have three of what this person is taking it is obviously good. Since it blinds him of all reality. | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: Unfair comparsion.. You're the one who needs to open your eyes. US Telcos have received soooooo much $$ to wire every freakin home and yet they still rape consumers when it comes to internet access.
Adi | |
|
| |  SLDPremium
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA | You get Bellsouth internet access in the EU as well? | |
|
|  badtripI heart the East BayPremium
join:2004-03-20
Albany, CA | said by Rob:It's unfair to compare Europe to the U.S. That's true. Europe may or may not have a competitive broadband industry while the US most certainly does not have a competitive broadband industry. | |
|
| | | You are right it is unfair to compare the US to Europe, because it is obvious in Europe competition thrives and is actually doing what it should be doing....... benefiting the customer.
NO WHERE in the US is this true so there is no comparison. And no, having a duopoly in an area that pretty much charge and do the same thing is NOT competition. So in that regard, even Verizon rolling out FIOS in areas that another cable company in is NOT competition. | |
|
| | baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: Unfair comparsion.. I dont know where abouts most people live, bu in my area, there is Comcast (16mb hsi), Wide Open West cable (15mb hsi), UVerse (18mb), and FiOS will be here next year. Not to mention DSL and the WiMax that will be here next year too.
I consider 4 major providers to choose from pretty competitive | |
|
| | | | | Re: Unfair comparsion.. That is not the norm across America. Most people have one ILec and one Cable Company to choose from. | |
|
| | |  imrfPremium
join:2002-06-06
Utica, MI | I wouldn't count on that ever happening. Unless you have something from Verizon saying that they are going to come into the SE counties. I haven't heard anything about them hitting Oakland, Wayne or Macomb counties. | |
|
| | | | | said by baineschile:I dont know where abouts most people live, bu in my area, there is Comcast (16mb hsi), Wide Open West cable (15mb hsi), UVerse (18mb), and FiOS will be here next year. Not to mention DSL and the WiMax that will be here next year too. I consider 4 major providers to choose from pretty competitive Don't count on Fios coming to Michigan.. with AT&T in most of the area, it's a VERY small possibility. | |
|
| | | | baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI | Re: Unfair comparsion.. FiOS is in a few cities around Flint, like Grand Blanc, Swartz Creek, etc. I dont know about western MI where you are. | |
|
| | | | | You are fortunate, but how are the prices/services in your area compared to others?
If they are actually fighting for your business through competitive pricing and services then I would say good for you.
However, if your prices/services are pretty much the same as everywhere else then there is no true competition. They simply are existing together and being that most people wont change providers very lightly they enjoy the locked in revenue. | |
|
| | |  DaMaGeINCThe Lan ManPremium
join:2002-06-08
Greenville, SC
kudos:2 | Consider yourself lucky. You live in .0002% of actually reality | |
|
|  Matt3All noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | said by Rob:It's unfair to compare Europe to the U.S. There's no way that a MSO in the U.S. could offer all that for $38 USD. It's just not possible. TV networks (ahem ESPN) want an arm and a leg and refuse to negotiate (i.e. NFL and Comcast dispute). Then make ESPN pay like HBO is. Sports junkies will buy it regardless and folks like me will (try not to laugh) have a lower cable bill. | |
|
| |
See 9 replies to this post |
|
| | | Of course we cannot do it here. If we do it, how are we going to pay those millions and billions dollar of bonus every year. That's bonus even for a lousy job.
said by Rob:It's unfair to compare Europe to the U.S. There's no way that a MSO in the U.S. could offer all that for $38 USD. It's just not possible. TV networks (ahem ESPN) want an arm and a leg and refuse to negotiate (i.e. NFL and Comcast dispute). | |
|
|  CT3
@comcast.net | From the linked article
Cable Europe, which claims that European cable operators invest about €4 billion ($5.1 billion) in their networks each year, is keen to point out how its members, which provide service to about 73 million households around the continent, provide infrastructure-based competition to the telcos.
Sounds pretty expensive to me...
I tried to compare financial reports of comcast and Numéricable to see how true the operation costs versus customer cost claim is, but alas I am not a frenchie and could not read anything at their website.
Someone tell captain censorship his first sentence in the DSL article makes no sense though please. | |
|
|
1 edit | OK, but why is there not one of the 48 states in the US, that are smaller in size than France, that has every house hold or at least 85 to 90% provided with a comparable package? Not even our smallest states have been able to receive this level of coverage. So, what is your reasoning for this? Try considering greed as the possible solution. We can stay on this failed model, but it does conflict with "all men are created equal." Broadband, if not a necessity today will be in very few years. Do we wait until we have a competitive meltdown and then try to fix it or address the obvious now?
Edited a spelling error. | |
|
| | RobIn Deo speramus.Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:3 | Re: Unfair comparsion.. said by lvlorpheus:OK, but why is there not one of the 48 states in the US, that are smaller in size than France, that has every house hold or at least 85 to 90% provided with a comparable package? Not even our smallest states have been able to receive this level of coverage. So, what is your reasoning for this? Try considering greed as the possible solution. We can stay on this failed model, but it does conflict with "all men are created equal." Broadband, if not a necessity today will be in very few years. Do we wait until we have a competitive meltdown and then thy to fix it or address the obvious now? I blame the FCC most of all.
Why is it, however, that Comcast can provide me 8/2 Internet for $52.95/mo. or 6/1 for $42.95/mo. but AT&T can only offer me 1.5/256 for $32.95?
The FCC isn't "holding" AT&T back. And it's not "pushing" Comcast either. For me, I choose Comcast for the speed, and for $10 dollars more I get twice the download and 4x the upload.
IMO, Comcast is "forcing" AT&T to be competitive in my area, and they are failing to do so.
So Comcast is able to charge us $42.95/mo. for 6/1. If AT&T offered 6/1 for $42.95/mo., maybe Comcast would be a little more competitive.
Don't hate the player, hate the game. | |
|
| nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 | And why is it that we must pay for ESPN exactly? Give me ESPN-less TV if it's going to reduce the price!
The problem in the US is simple- there's no choice for consumers because there is no competition. | |
|
|  MysticGogetaThe Robot DevilPremium
join:2005-03-14
League City, TX
1 edit | Its amusing what people call competition here. When a provider comes in with similar prices with TV its not competition. They increase their internet speeds to make you think your getting a better value.
--
Team Discovery-Join the fight | |
|
|  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | They actually get a lot of the same channels we can get. Including several from ESPN.
»www.numericable.fr/offre/offre_t···p?id=160
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
| elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA | said by Rob:It's unfair to compare Europe to the U.S. There's no way that a MSO in the U.S. could offer all that for $38 USD. It's just not possible. TV networks (ahem ESPN) want an arm and a leg and refuse to negotiate (i.e. NFL and Comcast dispute). That's simply not true. There is no requirement on the part of the cable or satellite companies to carry, or pay ESPN a single penny.
The cable/satellite lobby has more power than the content providers. Its just more convenient and profitable for them to charge their monopolistic rates and blame someone else.
If they put the same effort into breaking up the ESPN channel-bundling requirements as they are pursuing metered billing to prevent future competition, we wouldn't be having this discussion. | |
|
| | no fair holly crap thats unfair I curently pay $104.99/mo for 15Mbps/2Mbps and then $153.71/month for TV and $60/mo for Phone..
I want 100Mbps, Phone, TV all for $38/month.. | |
|
|
| Lazlow
join:2006-08-07
Saint Louis, MO | Re: Available... where? Why should the median income affect the price that much? If you are trying to say labor is twice as expensive over here, that should not effect the price as much as it does. In many markets here in the US(metro areas, not BFE) 5/512 is $60/month. | |
|
| nitzanPremium,VIP
join:2008-02-27
kudos:2 | You're comparing apples to oranges. You provided the French GDI (gross disposable income) and the US gross income. They are not the same. Gross income is before taxes - disposable income is after.
France GDI: Euro 17,597 ($22666)
US GDI: around $28500
Source: »www.bea.gov/briefrm/percapin.htm
France average income: Euro 38004 ($48952)
source: »www.insee.fr/fr/themes/tableau.a···CCF04205
US average income: $50,233 (based on your link)
The difference is only 2.5% in gross income and 20% in disposable income (taxes are higher in France). Although not as rich as the US - France is a very wealthy country relatively speaking. Lower GDI does not explain the huge difference in pricing - it's all about (lack of) competition in the US. | |
|
| | What are the per box fees on top of that? What are the per box fees on top of that? | |
|
| | Broadband competition I see comments about it being expensive to provide these cable networks. I don't doubt that is true. However, what the networks and the cable companies need to realize is that they are losing customers this way. For instance, I can get cable where I live of course but I refuse to pay $50/mo for a bunch of channels which mostly carry garbage I am not interested in. Give me the option to choose only the channels I really like (History, Discovery, National Geographic, TLC, HGTV, SCIFI, PBS, CNN, Local channels) and then charge me only to subscribe to those I really want. I refuse to pay more than $50/mo for stuff that is just filler that I have the pain in the rear of filtering through to find what I really want anyway. Charter or networks? Are you listening? I don't think so. In the mean time I will stay with AT&T Southeast until they implement caps and then I will switch to Charter. AT&T, are you listening? If Charter implements caps I'll just live without internet like I do cable tv. Thanks. I am not an idiot and will not waste money or be hoodwinked about "exaflood" myths and "inability" to provide bandwidth. | |
|
| RRMANPremium
join:2007-04-02
Cleveland, OH | Re: Broadband competition If I count the number of channels I watch regularly I could only count about 10 – 15 channels, and in this world of 200 plus channel that does not spell a bright future for the channels I don’t watch. For many ESPN would be a must have, but not for me I would rather have The Science Channel. The idea of managing customers Ala Carte choices would be a major headache as well, imagine sitting on the phone with a customer as they are trying to choose 20 channels they want out of 500 channel choices? Then again imagine being a customer on the phone having some CSR explain to you all your 500 channels. I am sure you can see the headaches there.
So if your satellite (or cable) bill seems to high, take a good look around at what other entertainment choices cost. You just might already have one of the best entertainment values already. | |
|
| |  KoilPremium
join:2002-09-10
Irmo, SC
kudos:1 | Re: Broadband competition It wouldn't be that hard...either send em this in the mail, or have them logon and select the choices they want online. | |
|
| | This SUCKS all this talk about paying for ESPN and the like with no choice makes me cringe. Why not bring up QVC or HSN or the other 100's of crap channels that hog cable and satellite line ups. Broadband should be SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much cheaper. Hell let's just make it free and be done with it. | |
|
| RRMANPremium
join:2007-04-02
Cleveland, OH | Re: This SUCKS Lets not...how about we give everyone in America medical insurance and worry about this crap later. | |
|
| | | | Re: This SUCKS medical insurance??? yea make those greedy corps walk away with more unneeded $$$$
how about making an affordable medical plan for EVERYONE and not the select 10% of the US.
Better yet remove the FED from the equation all together, "NO MONEY" in the US,,,but wait then what do we do????
The WHOLE system is flawed and seems to be quickly failing the FED, watch out for the new and improved AMERO in all of NORTH AMERICA!!!!!! | |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Those prices include the various VATs If not, they don't look so good. | |
|
|  tobyTroy Mcclure
join:2001-11-13
Seattle, WA | Re: Those prices include the various VATs Add around 15% for VAT, maybe they have the fees like they do here, but I don't think they do. | |
|
| | DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Re: Those prices include the various VATs We don't know what other taxes they have, like the UK's "TV" tax. It would be like cell phone or POTS pricing where the "real" price is double or nearly double because of taxes and junk fees. | |
|
| | This is cheap HEY CHARTER...
Umm, how about offering me this package? In fact you could just give me the 16 Mb and the rest for the same price.
What's wrong, chicken? | |
|
 dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | 60 megs UPLOAD for $101 and im paying $60 for 1. shows how much we're getting ripped off in the states!
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
| | Actually it should be free Direct tv and cable networks make millions without us having to pay for it, and they still milk it to the death. | |
|
| | 120Mbps/60Mbps drool.. -_- | |
|
| | This is why Rogers is better than Bell All the modems we have now have been upgraded from 1 to 2.0, and this is why I always stress to my employees to buy stock @rogers. They really give us a deal on it. | |
|
| | o well.. Seems like Europe is getting the best Internet around the world(well maybe next to Japan).
seems like my 10mbps plan is changed to 20mbps/2 next summer, i never knew any company called "UPC" existed lol
even though UPC poland is in the pricy range compared to the others(for example, UPC romanian offers 20mbps for $20/month o_O), i don't care, $50/month for 20/2 will do me good. Although one of my friends there got 35-50mbps internet, but i never got the chance to ask him where he got that speed from, o well, until next summer, i guess i'll be stuck with this 3GB Download Cap so called "ADSL" ****.
 | |
|
| | Missing the Point In the US a standard channel is 6 MHz long. In Europe it is 8 MHz long. You can pack more data in that 8 MHz Downstream to that modem, or HDTV for that matter, than you can to that 6 MHZ channel for a modem or HDTV in the US. The Cable industry in the US is trying to catch up by implementing channel bundling (2-6 MHz channels together to achive a 12 MHz bandwidth). The European's do this and still have the advantage (16 MHz). Do not even get started on the fact they are using 512 QAM in some places and we are still using 64 or 256 QAM in our downstream.
SEE DOCSIS 3.0 | |
|
CalleC
join:2009-01-11
Los Angeles, CA | No Matter What you do it's very expensive - cable or satellite. Satellite can be more troublesome than cable in areas with high winds or extreme weather. I don't understand why there is a perception than satellite tv is less expensive...don't agree with that. Voip Girl
| |
|
|
|
·