This is actually huge news as it marks the beginning of what many of us feared and destroys future entrpeneurship. I have no idea why the FCC decided mobile Internet should allow these practices.
Millions of dollars worth of lobbying & Astroturfing.
Check out CTIA's front group 'MyWireless.' They claim to be 'a nonpartisan non-profit advocacy organization, made up of wireless consumers, businesses and community leaders from around the country, supporting reasonable pro-consumer wireless policies.'
In fact they share an office with CTIA and have the same press contact as CTIA. Their net neutrality stance is what you would expect, though the writing is comical: These big online companies - and their blogosphere and celebrity supporters - want to stop wireless carriers from managing their wireless networks - especially wireless Internet...If the FCC and Congress let flashy online companies and their billionaire founders write regulations that favor their businesses, American wireless and Internet consumers will ultimately lose money, choices, security and quality.
There is competition in mobile internet, whereas for non-mobile many people only have one or two realistic choices. That could be why mobile gets less regulation.
First, you have omitted other providers whose prices are not similar to those above. Clear, for example.
Second, competition is about more than just price. It is also about features and restrictions. The provider that this thread is about is offering a lower priced plan WITHOUT a contract, but with restrictions on what you can do with it.
(EDIT: continuing, as I thought of another significant factor)
Another problem is that you are looking at mobile USB internet access plans, rather than mobile phone access plans. Most users don't have a strong opinion (or any opinion at all) on which particular dongle is hanging off their laptop. Hence, given several mobile USB internet providers offering similar level of service (e.g., 5 GB/month) and similar terms and conditions (2 year contract), the expected result in a competitive market is for them to all charge about the same price.
Of course, in a non-competitive market dominated by a cartel, the expected result is ALSO for them to all charge the same price.
Net (no pun intended) result: your examples provide no evidence one way or the other on the question of competitiveness in mobile internet.
I wasn't trying to provide a comprehensive mobile services price comparison, I simply chose a service I knew to have comparable terms across the 4 national carriers that own their own towers. MetroPCS and Clear both provide significantly different services being online only in certain metros.
I had skipped handset service because when fully loaded they have service tiers that make it difficult to do direct comparisons, probably intentionally. However:
AT&T unlimited voice: $69.99/mo
Verizon unlimited voice: $69.99/mo
T-mobile unlimited voice: $59.99/mo
Sprint 900 minutes (max): $59.99/mo
and:
AT&T ala carte SMS: $0.20 per
Verizon ala carte SMS: $0.20 per
T-mobile ala carte SMS: $0.20 per
Sprint ala carte SMS: $0.20 per
Considering the radically different cost basis of the two programs it's hard to believe there isn't some de-facto price coordination going on.
Hmm, you're right. I had gotten them from here: http://mobile-broadband-services-review.toptenreviews.com/ - I started getting them from sprint and verizon, but when I came across that and it fit what I had already found I went with it for the rest.
Thanks for the catch!
Quick check of the other 3 numbers shows that they're accurate according to the provider websites.
I don't really disagree with what you're saying but...
Verizon is $50/mo/5GB and that's LTE (4G) -- and if they don't subsidize the device, no contract.
MetroPCS is $60/mo (including taxes) for unlimited phone service including LTE. I don't like what they're doing here but if their service is any good (doubt it), that's a good deal.
