US, Canada, and Spain 'win' the battle for most expensive cellphone bills
By Laura June 
posted Aug 12th 2009 11:21AM
posted Aug 12th 2009 11:21AM
Update: The CTIA has issued a statement in response to the OECD's study, stating that it is, essentially, inaccurate by way or its choice of unrepresentative calling packages. The CTIA's full statement is after the break.
[Via IntoMobile]
CTIA-The Wireless Association(r) Responds to Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Communications Outlook Report on Usage and Cost for Mobile Phone Calls
WASHINGTON, DC - CTIA-The Wireless Association(r) issued the following statement today in response to the OECD Communications Outlook report on usage and cost for mobile phone calls:
The headline from the recently released OECD Communications Outlook report reads that Finland, the Netherlands, and Sweden have the lowest prices for mobile phone calls among OECD countries, while the highest prices were found in Canada, Spain, and the United States. But since U.S. consumers enjoy the lowest per minute rates of all of the OECD countries, what today's OECD report really shows is that some international comparisons just don't make sense - especially when built on flawed assumptions.
The real story is buried on page 275 of the OECD report which states:
"It is important to note again that the OECD calling pattern in the basket can be significantly different than common calling profiles in a specific country. For example, the high-usage OECD basket includes 1,680 outgoing voice calls per year while users in the United States average 9,600 minutes of voice calls (combined incoming and outgoing) per year. In this case the basket provides the cost of buying exactly the calls and messages in the OECD basket rather than what may be considered a 'typical' bundle in the market."
Since the average U.S. calling profile is nearly three times greater than the OECD's "high usage" basket (and, in fact, the average U.S. calling profile is nearly six times greater than the OECD's "average" usage basket), it is no surprise that most other sources show the price per-call (or price per-MOU) in the United States is the lowest among the OECD countries.
How did the OECD get it so wrong?
Only by picking such unrepresentative "representative" call packages, could the OECD have reached such a result. For example, the OECD defines a "medium use" customer as someone making 780 minutes of calls a year, and sending 600 SMS and 8 MMS messages a year. And the report says that based on their methodology, a U.S. customer would pay $53 a month in order to get that level of service. But that assumed "medium" basket works out to about 63 minutes, 50 SMS messages, and less than one MMS message a month. That just doesn't reflect reality.
CTIA's semi-annual survey shows that the average wireless consumer uses around 760 minutes a month, and over 400 text messages a month. Even if we only count half of those minutes as outgoing minutes (to mirror the OECD assumption), that's still six times as many minutes as the OECD methodology assumes. Plus, the CTIA survey showed that the average monthly consumer bill is $50.07. Moreover, since the most recent CTIA survey, a number of unlimited voice and text message plans have been introduced by U.S. wireless companies providing U.S. consumers with even greater value. For example, Tracfone offers its "Straight Talk" plan of unlimited minutes and text, nationwide, any time, for $45 a month, and Boost has a $50 a month plan that offers users unlimited talk, text, web and walkie talkie service.
When you look at the price American consumers actually pay for their wireless service, our per minute rates are the lowest of all the OECD countries.
yes we do with the power of internet, and we get to skip the commercials :)
600 SMS a year? I send that in less than a week...
Obviously this means we need universal phone coverage for all.
@Mycroft
If it doesn't involve euthanizing my granma's cellphone, then I am all for it...
Socialist im scared AAHHHHHH (im going to the next electronic show and yelling my ass off) first your eco-friendly phones now you want to tell me to recycle and now this UNIVERSAL PHONE COVERAGE this is abused!
And we get to get raped in the a.ss for text messaging and slow crappy internet usage.
Cell carriers ARE raping customers. The FEDS should look into price fixing by the carriers.
Notice their hasn't been a race to the bottom with pricing for service? How can this be? Where's the competition?
Apparently the cost of the plans has fallen between 20 and 30% since 2006. Not exactly a race to the bottom, but still dropping. However, with new data plans (not covered in the survey) that price drop is negated.
I would like to know when the rate plans dropped that 20%, because they seem to have only gotten higher...
xcrunk,
Price fixing by the government just means that more people will use it. If you think service is slow now, wait until the price is arbitrarily dropped by the government.
What should happen is that the federal government should reduce corporate taxes from 40% to 25%. The price of the service will fall greatly then.
Bullshit. The companies will use that as extra profit. Reducing corporate taxes will not reduce rates. What we really need is a new carrier modeled after a european one that offers european prices. Then people can finally stop taking it in the ass. I predict that eventually something similar to car companies will come in where foreign competitors will come in, offer higher quality products for cheaper and you'll see the slow crumbling of carriers that have become too large to survive.
Bob...you can manipulate the stats to give the wrong impression and the carriers are using smoke and mirrors here. Sure they may have dropped prices a bit at the high end and upper middle, but the bottom end has moved up.
A more revealing figure would be what has happened to the price of entry in the past 5-10 years. It used to be around 2003 that you could get a basic plan for around $19.99 -$29.99. Now you see that entry level begins at $40 with the top four carriers. That's an approximate 25%-50% increase in the price of entry. They aren't cutting their costs...they are consolidating everyone into a smaller pricing structure.
@Penguin Warlord- the old AT&T Wireless was partly NTT DoCoMo, and the T-Mobile here was supposed to be that. Only they got caught up in the "race to the bottom". Now if only they would encourage the entry of more foreign competitors (I'd like a Three America- I've been very happy with their service in HK) I'd be happier.
t-mobile is a German company
for $100 per month i can have FIVE phones with AT&T that share 700 minutes and each have unlimited in-network calls at any time, unlimited night and weekend calls to any carrier, and nationwide coverage with free roaming on any roaming partner's network. by the way, in-network calls includes more than 120 million wireless, landline, and business phone numbers. All for only $20/month per line. it seems impossible to me that this is the most expensive of any country. and then for $30/month more total, all lines can have unlimited texting to any domestic carrier. i just don't see how that is "being raped"
@youngcalihotty
In Singapore, where the cost of living is 11th highest in the world, I can get unlimited 3.5G data, free tethering/internet calls, bundled minutes + SMS/MMS/Video calls etc etc etc for what would amount to roughly USD$40. There is a much more powerful bundle that pretty much amounts to near unlimited everything for about USD$70. But to be frank, I opted for the $40 plan using it for both business and personal calls (with free to negligible cost regional and international calls). I've yet to pay any extras on top of that $40 and I get reliable coverage even in bomb-shelter grade structures & tunnels.
Singapore is an extremely pricey place to live (more expensive than NY last time I checked and where the price of a basic, low end car will set you back $45,000!
Let me guess, The Netherlands can probably receive MMS on their iPhones too...
Aye :)
We also have HDTV, 100/100mbit fiber connections and kick ass health care :)
Or at least I do
Yes we can.
I pay € 30 a month for 150 minutes (incoming calls are free), 150 sms messages (again, incoming free) and unlimited 2 Mbit/s 3G for my iPhone.
Although I hate AT&T and Verizon, the high costs are actually due to population density.
Netherlands: 1025/sqkm
US: 31/sqkm
source: google'd "#COUNTRY# population density"
It's not surprising that Canada, Australia, and Russia have high costst as well, as each has an even smaller density than the US does. Here's a list from Wiki of nations with greater population densities than the US: Madagascar, Zimbabwe, Azerbaijan, Cameroon, Djibouti. It's hard to compare apples to oranges, especially when you don't take into account that an Apple is different from an Orange (UK).
I hate the fact I have to pay $20 for unlimited texting ($30 on my AT&T family plan for everyone), but it's the price you have to pay if you don't want cramped living.
I've got a better comparison, let's compare real estate in Japan to real estate in the US (337/sqkm for the former).
I propose we have discounts for those living in cities then. It's not at all fair that I have to pay for those who have chosen to live in rural areas.
If MetroPCS can get their act together a little bit more, I'm seriously considering switching. $50/mo for unlimited EVERYTHING, with no contracts to sign.
Hung,
An excerpt from the OECD study: "Finland, the Netherlands and Sweden have the lowest prices for mobile phone calls among OECD countries, according to the latest OECD Communications Outlook."
You are defending high US prices for low population density. How then do you explain Finland offering the lowest mobile prices?
Finland: 17/sqkm
US: 31/sqkm
I would think population density would lower costs. For the same reason the carriers hate building towers out in the middle of Utah. 10 customers per tower is not as profitable as 200 customers per tower.
GebradenKip: That's a bit expensive.
For about £45 (52 Euro) a month here, you get 1200 minutes anytime, any network (incoming calls are also free in the UK), 500 sms messages and unlimited 3G data.
I'm Dutch, but I don't benefit from those low prices.
Mind you, I live in Canada.
+2! :-)
I am shipping up to Sweden wayy-yooo!
That's because you forgot to research in Brazil. I've payed a bill of US$3.000 last year!
They didn't "forget" Brazil, the OECD is only the most developed economies in the world. Brazil is not a member of the OECD.
It didn't say that the research was limited to the OECD countries, it just said that it was conducted by the OECD.
Stop being such an ass, you just made bad comments for everybody. Go get laid.
You are the ass, moron.
I blame the government
You’re government should definitely get allot more involved in stuff like this, and stop companies from using different standards (which makes competition go by by). This is one of the best examples of how capitalism isn't always the best way, and the main reason why the US should become more socialistic. ;)
Cheaper cellphone bills for everyone!!!
"780 minutes per year of voice calls, and 600 SMS per year."
Is that per month, because 780 minutes a year is nothing, that would only be 65 minutes a month
That's how much a lot of people actually use their cell phones. I have a constant bank of ~3500 rollover minutes with AT&T, and I've never come close to hitting the 450 minutes I'm forced to pay for. If there were a 100 minute/month plan, I'd be on it in a heartbeat. That's a big part of where the pricing is so skewed. The minutes you pay for vs. the minutes you actually use.
Also, as one commenter pointed out, his incoming calls and SMS are free in the Netherlands. Think about how many outgoing minutes you use per month.
I can't believe that 65 minutes a month is normal in developed countries. That would only be 2.16 minutes a day on average. A lot of people use a cell phone instead of having a land line at home. Unless you have no friends and family, you will be talking more the 2 minutes a day.
@CtrlBurn, I agree completely. I have thousands upon thousands of rollover minutes that I never use. Let me trade some of those minutes for texts. Or better yet, since I have unlimited data let me just use that for texting. It's absurd that texting costs what it does.
Then why do you text so much. Start calling more! I text for question/answer stuff but so many people text whole conversations. Calling is cheaper. I know everyone gets screwed on texting, but everyone is letting themselves get screwed. Stop using it so much and the price will drop. Its only expensive because it can be.
@interspectrum: I live in the US, but I use my cell phone much less than 65 minutes a month. I'm actually looking for a reasonably priced Skype Smartphone (ie: not just a wireless skype phone, but e-mail, web browsing and application support) for this very reason - I'm always either at my desk (where I can't use my cell phone), at home (where my VOIP line give me much cheaper rates than any cell phone), somewhere with WiFi access, or somewhere I don't want to be bothered. My Google Voice line is set up to forward calls to the correct destination - I receive maybe a dozen calls per month on my cell phone, and those are typically very short conversations.
I hear people say they need their cell phone, but very few people (truckers may be the exception, due to the extreme amount of time spent on the road) really do.
I think per year was supposed to be per month. I could be wrong though.
Yeah Engadget, tell that to T-Mobile Netherlands. High bill after bill after bill :(
It really depends on how you buy your phone here. If you buy an SIM-only, rates are dead-cheap.
If you opt for an smartphone for some sort, you get the phone absolutely free (even the most expensive ones, stuff like iPhones, blackberry, X1, N97 etc) but the rates can be a pain.
"If you buy an SIM-only, rates are dead-cheap."
Indeed, I'm sim-only and would melt the phone before I started paying for calls/texts/data outside of my plan
Eh, depends on what contract you have and how much you pay for it.
Example: T-Mobile Flex 15, 15 euros a month 0,20 a minute and SMS, you get 75 free SMSes/Minutes, but Flex 100 costs 100 euros, gives you 1000 free SMSes/Minutes and costs 0,10 for each when you get outside those borders. (There are loads of other options as well)
But yeah, Pre-Paid is dirt-cheap, unfortunately it's pretty hard to get an internet contract with it as well (The only one offering this is KPN), and ofcourse you'll have to pay for your cellphone instead of getting it for free.
*Whoa, I thought you guys were talking about pre-paid... I have no idea how I came to that conclusion, but I apologise.
@MMaster23, thank you! Those are some of my points in my long post. lol. Glad to see it confirmed by someone who lives there.
Europeans don't pay for incoming calls either. In England contracts are for 18 months, and usually get a free phone.
In Canada: 3 year contracts and an expensive plan for a slightly subsidized phone.
Protectionism hurts consumers.
18 months? Here in Scandinavia, at least in Norway, there's a law against cell phone contracts longer than 12 months. The reasoning being that consumers should and must be free to choose more competitive offers. The cell phone companies and MVNOs compete for real here. Of course you get to keep your number if you change provider etc.
The government even provides a free, neutral online plan price calculator to determine what provider is the best for your needs [depending on number of minutes/SMS you need]. They update it daily and providers use it in their advertising. It's all public and free information.
Ironic, how the US calls *my* country "socialist".
LOL!
Everyone thinks that because they don't pay for the incoming call that it's FREE. But it's not. It simply means what it says. They don't pay for the incoming call. But someone does. Who? The person who called them. That is why their billing method is called "Calling Party Pays." The person who makes the call pays for it. There's no such thing as "local calling." You pay for all calls you make. Wait, your friend is on a different carrier? Okay, you're going to pay even more for that then. Oh, what's that? Your friend is in the next state over? Ya, you're paying even more. And since you are currently on another carriers tower, you're paying more for that too.
Is there a big number of people only using 780 minutes per YEAR? I'm not much of a talker, and I go through at least 400min per month.
And who is paying $53 for 65 min and 50 text messages per month??
they don't get to watch "The Real Housewives of New Jersey" in the Netherlands, do they?
no, they get to smoke legal weed!
http://www.hk.chinamobile.com/p_tariff_plan_en.jsp (all Hong Kong dollars, 1 USD = $HK 7.75)
All plans comes with voice messages & forwarding, and there is no peak time vs. off-peak time stupidity.
My existing plan charges even less, HK$38 (US$5) for up to 1,000 minutes a month. Enough said...
That really is due to local factors more than anything else. After all European countries and the US are more expensive and have higher salaries [on average]. Right?
that is an amazing plan if true!
you are able to take advantage of the small calling area combined with high population density.
I was going to say that the population density of Sweden was probably higher and would lead to the cheaper cost, but when I looked, Sweden is at 57 per sq mile and the US has a higher density at 84 per sq mile. (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0934666.html)
Yupp we're not as dense as you guys ;).
This is kind of misleading. If you go and download the Excel spread sheets, you'll see that the US plan costs the same in the medium/high categories. So, even though the US has the most expensive in the mid range, you get service correlating to the higher range. When looking at the high usage sheet, the US isn't the most expensive anymore (it's only the 6th most costly).
again, that would be the point, this isn't a study on the cheapest plan, it's simply showing that per usage americans pay more because of our fixed plan rates. just because you spend 50 bucks on a play that has 1000 minutes does not mean you're gonna use 1000 minutes a month.
Don't get me wrong, US carrier prices are ridiculous but it is important to point out that the United States has a much lower population density than Europe. The cost of infrastructure is significantly higher in the US and Canada than in Europe.
A few items on that one: yes, in some ways, true. But coverage in the US sucks muuuuuuch more than in Europe. I've just been on vacation to Sweden: they have bloody HSDPA(!) 3G coverage in the last spot in the middle of the country side where there is no city / town in miles.
So, yes population density might not be exactly the same but the Swedes have great coverage in many places you would not even dream of trying it in the US. Then also Sweden has a very thinly populated northern part of the country so they know the issues we face here.
And not even in the big cities our companies get their act together: I have dropped calls, bad connection, high prices and ridiculously bad service right here in the middle of Manhattan.
The US cell phone companies are (unfortunately) totally crap. And no, population density unfortunately is no excuse here.
Gee, I've been to Tanzania where they they have a huge 3G internet usage / coverage at okish prices (and mind you these guys are not even connected to the rest of the world via fiber-optics yet!)
Bah, you are just retelling old "lies". The majority of the US population live in huge cities, and Europe has plenty of countries with much LOWER population density than the US.
Also in Europe you have domestic carriers in *each* country, they don't have the benefit of one HUGE market like the US. That gives US carriers better financing and cash flow, reducing the cost of infrastructure...
You Americans seem to repeat two "facts" about Europe again and again. We're "socialist" and "high density". It's so amusing!
I live in Spain and I pay calls to landline and cell phones $0,11 € per minute and $0,14 per SMS. The 10 first minutes to the same compay are free.
Now, who was that telecoms CEO again who claimed that mobile costs in the USA were much cheaper than in Europe and/or amongst the lowest in the world. I'm quite sure it was on Engadget a few weeks ago (but cannot find it anymore).
Well, if that guy assumes that the world ends at the border of the USA (like most Americans do :-) he's probably right....
Good thing you know how most Americans think. Did you also know we hate people like you?
" that guy assumes that the world ends at the border of the USA (like most Americans do"
You always hear this from Europeans. Its like a little man's complex. Maybe you guys really are as insignificant as we "assume"
Don't listen to those dumbasses. The rest of the American population agrees that US prices are gouged, and that cellular service execs are full of themselves.
Most of Americans have to defend our image because our higher total population invariably leads to a higher number of idiots who have blind nationalism, even when we're wrong. America is the best overall country in the world, don't get me wrong. I'm glad to have immigrated, but there exists a few things (very few, but more than zero) in which the US falls short. One of our biggest problems is denying internet service to idiots.
@Hung
I'm not sure whether we are paying more or less, because this report does not accurately provide that information. I'm not "defending" the US, but you have to realize that the billing methods here and what gets included in our plans are significantly different than other countries. It seems to me that we have both pros and cons to our prices, but if we have more cons than pros I would like to know. Unfortunately, this report is most likely not a reliable tool for determining that information.
I would imagine this has a great deal to do with the cost of "last mile" service. It is more expensive (per capita) to deliver service to countries with lower population densities and less urbanization. According to official OECD data, Netherlands is the second densest country in the OECD (South Korea is first). Likewise, Canada has the second-lowest density of any country (the United States is eighth and Spain is twelfth). Sweden also as relatively low population density but that is primarily due to large uninhabited parts in the north of the country.
My point is that high prices do not necessarily equate with high profits. There are sound economic reasons why cellular service costs more in certain countries than in others.
The north of Sweden and Norway is *not* uninhabited. It's not like Canada, it's not frozen wasteland. We actually have cities and lots of smaller towns and villages all over the northern parts of Scandinavia. And we're both OECD countries. Sweden has a *higher* population density than Norway.
While the situation is different in Sweden, in Norway the carriers have to cover the *entire* country. And they do. And that's for 4.7 million people.
Telenor, our largest national telecoms company is the 7th largest in the world [>150 million subscribers]. They have huge profits from their home market. Norway is after all one of the worlds richest countries, second highest GDP in Europe after tiny Luxembourg (IMF).
@Andrew
Excuse me? Frozen wasteland?
I hear ya, we are getting ripped off. But for what you pay in the US, you generally get "free" calling across the whole country, which is about the size of Europe. For the price you pay in Europe, you do not get "free" calling across all of Europe, not even close.
What we really need in the US is better PAYG (pay-as-you-go) service. That's why our low-cost service isn't low-cost. Look at the UK figure: 0 fixed costs. You only pay for your minutes. Our big carriers have worked to marginalize or kill PAYG in order to pad their take.
well three and other companies are trying to stop companies charging each other when they take calls. once thats done next in country calls
but by that time 90% of calls will be going through the net any who, removing any location charges.
Yeah, you might have cheaper long distance calls, but your comparison makes no sense!
Europeans do NOT *regularly* call people in other European countries. Except for the odd friend or while on holiday Europeans usually just call within their *own* country. We don't even speak the same languages across those 48 European countries! Europeans don't have the mobility that American workers have, too many cultural and language barriers.
Also the EU has demanded that European carrier regulate their prices to offer European consumers better rates when calling abroad. They complied pretty quickly!
@Andrew,
So then it is not a fair comparison either way. Because in the US we *DO* frequently call other states. Especially so among people who live in large cities. I live in Los Angeles, and I frequently call friends in Las Vegas, Dallas, New York, Cincinnati, and Miami. As a matter of fact, I have someone from San Diego and Cincinnati on my calling plan. For only $10 per line per month they share my minutes and get unlimited free in-network calls and free calls to any network on nights and weekends. I'm not going to pretend that I know everything about mobile billing, because I don't. So I ask you, do the carriers in your area offer anything similar?
Yeah, so you don't get that, and so you don't pay for it, and that reduces the cost of your service somewhat. I don't know how big a factor it is, but it has to be part of it, because if you don't need it, companies like MetroPCS and Boost Mobile will offer you cheaper plans that don't have it.
I am sure South Africa has the highest cellphone bills, but it wasn't in this research.
South Africa might be cheap, but that's not what the OECD was looking for.
They didn't "forget" South Africa, the OECD is an organization for the MOST developed economies in the world. South Africa is not a member of the OECD.
I'm sure you can find much cheaper prices somewhere in the world, but the OECD is only interested in developed nations.
For a while i thought it was a matter of Infratucture here in the United States. Much like how we are dependant on Oil is in part due to the HUGE distances we have between major cites, and moreso that we are off all by ourselves compared to the EU.
But i say Bullshit. Cell companies don't have the same costs as say laying fiber down across thousands of miles, like land lines or dedicated data lines. ANd the prices in major cities should be much lower.
MUCH like the crash of the housing market and the auto market, i GUARANTEE you will see a huge crash in telecoms as well. The housing market become so overinflated it crashed, because you cant make people pay more than they have (see the credit crunch as well as bank closures) and it comes to a head.
The reason why all that happened is all of a sudden... people couldn't and wouldn't keep paying for things they couldn't afford.
So the same will HAVE to happen with the cell industry in the us.
Why are rates so high? Because you will pay them. Now the money is starting to dry up, but no one wants to be the first to dip the price for fear of a free fall.
So in response you have certain companies offering what looks like a premium for unlimited everything, which is a fallacy. Typically people don't use that much with those unlimted services unless its data. Companies know this and say "well shit they arent going to bleed us.. lets make it LOOK like an incentive"
Want lower rates? Spend less, drop your carrier, or switch to someone else.
NOTHING gets a companies attention like hemorrhaging massive amounts of money.
That is Unless your Sony.
You'll see in the next few months as the recessions ripples out, there willbe signs of lowered prices.
It just has to!
i definitely have respect for what you are saying and i see where you are coming from with those thoughts. but the actual numbers are showing the complete opposite of the trend you mentioned. sprint is undoubtedly the lowest priced national carrier, but they are the ones hemorrhaging customers.
I threatened to leave AT&T because of their expensive plans and they are giving me a credit of $20 a month for two months. Service is pretty good, but I am still leaving. Not enough extras to keep me. Sprint see you in two months (yes they have great service in my area and I hate my iphone 3g).
http://www.vodafone.in/newusers/whyvodafone/postpaid/talk_plans/pages/talk_plans_del.aspx?cid=del
Vodaphone india, Rs. 333 gives you 444 local minutes and 222 SMS, Call Id, Waiting etc is all included. Rs. is roughly 7 USD.
i got a AirCel Cellular sim card with lifetime validity for Rs. 25 (50 cents) & it had 10-local minutes
local SMS's are free
GPRS charges -> Rs. 99 ( US $ 2) per month gives you unlimited data transfer
Yeah, yeah, India is cheap. The OECD is only looking at its *members*, the *MOST* developed nations in the world.
They're not looking for the world's cheapest prices.
But docomo, unlike those two, charges per second which is handier for short calls.
ROFL stop bitching.
You guys have it soooooo much better than New Zealand.
Our MTR is the most expensive in the world and well our plans are SHOCKING, TBH I have no idea how the hell we were not #1 for the worst
600 sms and 780 minutes a year??? wtf thats nothing i do 600 sms a day and 100 mins a month for £15 you guys are being robbed
The Real Housewives of Amsterdam is very relevant to my interests
I love how all the people from the US are complaining about their prices when ours in Canada are probably 2x worse.
On the spreadsheet in question, US is the highest at 279.52, Canada is at about the 60% percentile at 195.68. No idea what the units are, but higher means more expensive.
So Canada is much cheaper than the US in this area.
@why not the LS2LS7?
Have you had to cell phone/service plan shop in Canada? -.-
Believe me when I say that we pay AT LEAST 40% more than the guys in the US unless you can, say, have been a customer of X carrier for 6+ years and bend over backwards trying to find some way of fooling Rogers people into changing your IMEI so you can use the "Unlimited Mobile X" Plan intended for Pay-As-You-Go phones only (aka cheap, meant for crappy phones).
Then, we might only pay 20% more than you guys.
MZLWeasel:
Almost half my friends are Canadian. I'm familiar with your beefs. However, if you want to say the Canadian figures in the study are wrong, then you just as easily could say the American figures are wrong too.
Rogers is the most expensive carrier, no? And you're using them? Maybe the problem with your rates is you aren't really willing to shop around?
I just calculated what i would have to pay for 780 minutes and 600 sms messages. (i am located ind denmark, using Bibob as phone company)
Total 96 dolalrs, that is 8 dollars a month.
Personaly i pay 7,6 dollars a month for a 1 gb data plan for my mobile phone (but it is only a slow 512 kbit connection), and i pay 32 dollars a month for a 2 mbit mobile internet connection (3g HSDPA) with a 10 gb data limit.
I am really surprised when i see how much your americans have to pay for mobile phone calls and services.
SMS is such a ripoff. Every cell phone uses SMS all the time for things like voice mail alerts and other low level functions of the network. And yet, the carriers have gone from free SMS to 5 cents, 10 cents, and now 20 cents per message. Assuming you use all 160 characters, thats ~$1400 per megabyte. Someone figured out that it's cheeper for NASA to receive a megabyte of data from the Mars rovers then it is to receive SMS messages without a text plan.
Hey guys, don't pout, you could have the American anti-competitive Health Care system.
*tear
*sniff sniff...
*tear
*sniff sniff...
*cough, hack, weez...
*heart palpitation...
*cardiac arrest
*mortgage renewal
FIX'D
Spain's economy is 10 times less than the USA so they should be paying less, DUH! So with that being said, when comparing GDPs and the amount one spends on cell phone usage, Spain charges $5000 (500x10) a year compared to $635 here in the USA if they had the same economy output. You have to compare GDPs to be comparing apples to apples, don't ya?
It's quite obvious you are not an economist! Did you account for the fact that the *population* is much smaller? Your logic is so silly I can't be bothered to write more. You should look at the concept of purchasing power parity. GDP is meaningless.
Also, it's a well known fact that the Spanish economy has a huge underground economy that does *not* show up in the stats.
@ Andrew. I think you missed my point by the chart being misleading. Take Mexico for an example with the chart showing cheaper rates than the US. To get national calling there one must buy the $100/mo plan that US people get for FREE on a $40/mo plan. To make matters worse for a Mexican, one averages only $6 a day in income. That is a HUGE burden to that person compared to a US plan. Is Mexico's rates than cheapers? NO!!!
Source: http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/mexico/entries/2007/02/26/post_1.html
I don't think it works that way. Pretty much most economists can tell you that GDP is riddled with holes.
Plus your logic would imply that as India's GDP is approximately 1/14th of the USA's, we should be paying about $350,000 for a Honda Civic that costs about $25,000 USD in India.
a rebuttal from CTIA...
http://www.wirelessweek.com/News-CTIA-OECD-Report-081209.aspx
The problem in Canada is that we're nickel and dimed to death. You can get a decent cell phone plan for $25/month, but if you want caller ID and voicemail, two services you'd think would be basic in the year 2009, it's an extra $15 a month. Then you add on the $6.95 "system access fee", 911 fee, and tax, and your $25 plan is over $50. Then add in the fact that we get no value out of that plan (billed by the minute, local calls only, no rollover minutes, "evening" minutes starting at 9pm) and you can see why we have it so bad.