News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Countries With Zero Rating Have More Expensive Wireless by munk-a on Thursday February 07, 2019 @05:22PM (#19109203)
I'd assume ISPs are taking infrastructure into their cost calculations, even in a case where the initial build out was government subsidized... things break, there are ongoing costs.

And my totally uninformed understanding is that the ongoing maintenance costs, and the costs of expanded service are both pretty minimal.

Re:Countries With Zero Rating Have More Expensive Wireless by rayiner on Thursday February 07, 2019 @06:56PM (#19109911)
Both are incorrect. Almost no ISP infrastructure is “government subsidized.” Almost all the subsidies are urban ISPs subsidizing rural ones. There was a tiny bit of actual government subsidy under Obama as part of the post-recession stimulus.

And ongoing maintenance and support costs are very high. Even if you don’t trust Verizon’s SEC disclosures (showing 5% or less in operating profit for wireline) look at the financial statements for something like Chattanooga’s EBP. The vast majority of revenue goes to ongoing costs, before you even get to paying down the initial build out.

Re:Countries With Zero Rating Have More Expensive Wireless by shmerl on Thursday February 07, 2019 @07:52PM (#19110264)
Given severe lack of competition among ISPs in US, I don't buy the bogus argument that current prices are fair. Simple market logic suggests, that they overcharge, because they can. Therefore they do have more than enough money for their upgrades.

And on top of that, most simply prefer to pocket them instead of investing into the network, with "no one needs it" excuse. Something they would never have done with healthy competition.