vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA
 ·Comcast
| I'd like to know
Of the 14 countries ahead of the US in broadband penetration, what is their total land size & population density versus the US? I'm not saying our policy isn't partially responsible, but I'd like to quantify the effect of policy by eliminating the obvious. |
|
LastSurvivor
join:2008-01-02
Toledo, OH
| ----
Over the past year, the number of broadband subscribers in the OECD increased 24% from 178 million in June 2006 to 221 million in June 2007. This growth increased broadband penetration rates in the OECD from 15.1 in June 2006 to 18.8 subscriptions per 100 inhabitants one year later.
The main highlights for June 2007 are:
* Denmark, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Korea, Norway and Iceland lead the OECD in broadband penetration, each with over 29 subscribers per 100 inhabitants.
* The strongest per-capita subscriber growth over the year was in Ireland, Germany, Sweden, Australia, Norway, Denmark and Luxembourg. Each country added more than 5 subscribers per 100 inhabitants during the past year.
* Operators in several countries continue upgrading subscriber lines to fibre. Fibre-to-the-home (FTTH) and Fibre-to-the-building (FTTB) subscriptions now comprise 8% of all broadband connections in the OECD, up from 7% one year ago, and the percentage is growing. Fiber connections account for 36% of all broadband subscriptions in Japan, and 31% in Korea.
* The United States is the largest broadband market in the OECD with 66.2 million subscribers. US broadband subscribers now represent 30% of all broadband connections in the OECD.
----
Check out this link »www.oecd.org/document/60/0,3343,···,00.html
It's based on Broadband subscribers per 100 inhabitants, by technology, June 2007, if you see that Denmark (ranked 1st) has only 1.866 mil subs. while US has 66.2 mil subscribers, but yet we are 15th because of total population. |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| reply to vpoko
said by vpoko  :Of the 14 countries ahead of the US in broadband penetration, what is their total land size & population density versus the US? I'm not saying our policy isn't partially responsible, but I'd like to quantify the effect of policy by eliminating the obvious. The OECD has already done studies that normalize for population density.
The result: there is little or no correlation between population density and broadband penetration rankings.
In other words, the cry "but we're so much bigger and spread out" is just another empty excuse for the sorry performance of the U.S. |
|
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA
·Comcast
| I'd like to see the results that say there's "there is little or no correlation between population density and broadband penetration rankings." Simply put, I don't believe it. Even if national broadband policy has the bigger impact, how is it possible that pop. density is irrelevant to broadband penetration? There's no way that the correlation is zero. |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
edit:
May 2nd, @06:13PM
| I might have exaggerated when I said "no correlation", but here is the data:
»www.oecd.org/sti/ict/broadband
data released June '07; go to item 3a for the spreadsheet.
a correlation of 0.24 is pretty low; in addition, note that there are 6 countries ahead of the U.S. with lower pop density, in some cases, much lower (US = 32, Canada =3.3)
penetration per 100 inhabitants/Pop. density
Denmark 34.3 /126.1
Netherlands 33.5 /400.5
Switzerland 30.7 /183.0
Korea 29.9 /484.9
Norway 29.8 /14.4
Iceland 29.8 /3.0
Finland 28.8 /15.6
Sweden 28.6 /20.2
Canada 25.0 /3.3
Belgium 23.8 /345.8
United Kingdom 23.7 /247.3
Australia 22.7 /2.7
France 22.5 /115.1
Luxembourg 22.2 /181.8
United States 22.1 /32.0
Japan 21.3 /338.2
Germany 21.2 /230.8
Austria 18.6 /98.7
Correlation: 0.24 |
|
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA
·Comcast
| That's some pretty good data, certainly shows there are problems beyond population density. But I would say the data is still flawed. Countries like Canada and Australia have populated regions, and they have areas where nobody lives. In the US, on the other hand, most remote areas still have some population. In other words, there's a lot of dead mass. |
|
Tigerpaw509
Premium
join:2006-07-15
Huntley, IL | reply to nasadude
So why no catv in my neighborhood ? |
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·Cox HSI
 ·AT&T Southwest
| reply to vpoko
This argument has been rehashed over and over.
It has been demonstrated time and time again that geography and population density arguments only apply to rural areas; as has been stated, many cities in the USA exceed the population density and have similar geography issues as cities in other parts of the world where they have much more choice, much faster services and options, and much lower prices.
While I agree geography is a big factor for rural areas, when it comes to the urban areas, the argument that "It's so much harder or expensive to do here in the USA then ___________ " (name the advanced broadband country) is really just a red herring. The main factor is the lack of competition, the lack of regulatory leadership or enforcement and the insistence on only allowing large companies to dominate the market at levels of ROI they choose. In fact we even allow them to blackmail communities for special treatment.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) |
|
