Cable operators continue to absolutely dominate the US broadband industry, adding 84% of all net new subscribers during the second quarter. According to Analysis by Leichtman Research, the industry as a whole only added around 230,000 net new subscribers last quarter, thanks in large part to a saturated market. During that period cable providers added 460,000 subscribers, while telcos saw a net loss of around 230,000 during the quarter. In short: cable providers continue to absolutely dominate the industry.
"Cable companies added about 3.1 million broadband subscribers over the past year, while Telcos had net losses of about 550,000 broadband subscribers," said Bruce Leichtman, president and principal analyst for Leichtman Research Group, Inc.
"At the end 2Q 2017, cable had a 64% market share vs. 36% for Telcos. The broadband market share for cable is now at the highest level it has been since the first quarter of 2004."
The firm is quick to point out that every single major telco saw net broadband losses last quarter, but it doesn't bother to explain why. Some telcos (Verizon) have all but given up on next-generation broadband upgrades as they shift they forus toward wireless and advertising. Other telcos (Windstream, Frontier, CenturyLink) are either incapable or unwilling to upgrade their lagging DSL customers at any real scale, or have prioritized focusing on enterprise revenues.
The result? There's tens of millions of frustrated DSL customers paying a significant amount of money for sub 6 Mbps DSL connections. Connections that don't even technically meet the FCC's now standard definition of broadband (25 Mbps down, 4 Mbps up). Those customers are all fleeing to cable, which is now starting to deliver speeds up to 1 Gbps via relatively inexpensive DOCSIS 3.1 cable upgrades.
And while this is all great news for cable providers, it's not such great news for the American consumer. As competitive pressure diminishes, these cable giants are starting to enjoy a bigger broadband monopoly than ever before in many markets, since they technically have few if any competitors at speeds of 25 Mbps or above. That means less incentive to lower rates and improve customer service, and more incentive to engage in consumer annoyances like usage caps and overage fees, or privacy and net neutrality violations.
Combine that with the current government's plan to effectively
gut all meaningful oversight of these uncompetitive giants, and you've got a real recipe for trouble.