dslreports logo
Why Comcast's Claims That Wireless is a Competitor Are False

To get their merger approved by regulators, one of Comcast's key arguments is that the company faces so much competition on so many fronts that this competition will keep them honest. Most people know that Comcast enjoys little to no competition on the last mile, with AT&T and Verizon's retreat from many DSL lines making things less competitive than ever.

To get around this obvious truth and logic logjam, Comcast has insisted that pretty much every company in existence is competition, from Google Fiber (whose limited footprint barely scratches Comcast) to Hulu (which Comcast co-owns). Wireless LTE is also being trotted out as an example of "fierce competition," something the Consumerist's Kate Cox does a nice job dismantling this week by examining usage caps:

quote:
Our math says that trying to use your mobile data the same way you use your home wi-fi will cost you about twenty times more per month than your wired broadband bill. You’d have to be Walter White to be able to afford to watch all of Breaking Bad over your wireless network...

Using traditional home, wired broadband — cable or DSL — to watch all of Breaking Bad in one billing cycle would cost the average user between $30 and $100.

Using most wireless broadband — satellite or mobile — to watch all of Breaking Bad in one billing cycle would cost the average user between $1200 and $2200.
So comparable! Even Verizon has admitted that LTE is really nothing like a fixed-broadband connection. This is all of course before you remind people that Comcast and Verizon these days are marketing partners selling each others' services, not really competitors.

Most recommended from 24 comments



TAZ
join:2014-01-03
Tucson, AZ

4 recommendations

TAZ

Member

No need for all that

The #1 reason not to trust the claims: Comcast said it. If Comcast/Cohen tell me the sky is blue, I'm going to look out the window and expect to see the sky is red.