Via the Simple Dollar, we see this interesting Verizon versus AT&T comparo:

click for full infographic

Verizon vs. AT&T Infographic

Category: Digital Media, Technology

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

8 Responses to “AT&T/Verizon Duopoly”

  1. Moss says:

    Lets not forget the little trick that AT&T plays by charging you for a Smartphone data plan when the phone is not a Smartphone. This happened to one phone I have on a plan. They said ‘ our network thinks it is an IPhone’.

    Just like the giant banks, pharma, oil etc… they are parasites who do everything they can to stymie competition.

  2. Moe says:

    There’s an analogy in the somewhere concerning our two-party political system, but I’m too tired to dig for it.

  3. wally says:

    This duoploy is why I think owning both T and VZ is almost a no-lose idea. The market is here to stay and will continue to increase by leaps and bounds as more and more electronic equipment is sold; it’s just a matter of whether that increase goes to T or to VZ.
    Further, these are both high dividend payers. Even if they stagnate, you win.

  4. pjochicago says:

    I had a totally different take on the first chart: the industry isn’t anti-competitive, it’s hyper-competitive. Besides Sprint and T-Mobile there are over 180 other wireless phone providers in the U.S. That strikes me as much more competitive than most other industries in the U.S.

    If wireless customers really were terribly price sensitive they would move to one of these (likely) lower-cost competitors, but for a variety of reasons (national network preferences, 4G preferences, phone preferences, etc.) customers appreciate Verizon and AT&T’s value proposition.

  5. Hurricaner says:

    The telco’s duopoly cost consumers far more than any bank OD fees or other “predatory” fees that are being regulated in the spirit of populist ire…yet, nobody is screaming about these two being TBTF. Maybe because you get something for your money in the form of telephone service, vs. the bank just paying your car payment (or wireless bill, perhaps) even though you only have twelve cents in your account. Guess that’s not considered a service…or if it is…you have to offer it at cost, because banks are really utilities, and not private companies in the business of making money (just like apple, att, VZ, and everyone else out in business). never mind that the billers will charge you $20 or more for a returned payment – better to give it to them than to give an OD fee to the greedy banks.
    what a crock.

  6. peachin says:

    When a Smart Phone plan expires – it still works perfectly on any wi-fi which many are free or are in your home.

    Next Phone – buy one that does messages and phone calls only –

    For those who need a smart phone to chit chat, small talk, baby talk, – you deserve what you get!

    If you can plan your surfing near a wi-fi even in a parking lot of a provider that is free – no plan no plan except your wi-fi at your home which is unlimited for now and faster than any phone.

    Most of america is disorganized, sloppy in their life – companies count you you and you’ll pay any price!

  7. NEW YORK (AP) — Verizon Wireless on Wednesday said it will auction a parcel of radio frequencies, which could be worth billions of dollars in an industry scrambling to offer consumers more cellular broadband.

    The offer is contingent on Verizon getting government approval for three deals to buy spectrum from cable companies and Leap Wireless for a total of about $4 billion. Those deals were struck in November and December, but have met resistance from public-interest groups who say the cellphone company, already the nation’s largest, doesn’t need more spectrum and shouldn’t be cozying up to competitors such as the cable companies.

    [Read: Verizon Wireless to Charge for Phone Upgrades.]

    Spectrum rights are the lifeblood of the wireless industry, since they’re necessary to operate wireless networks. In recent years, growing demand for wireless data service has prompted cellphone companies to search for more spectrum, which would allow them to offer higher download speeds.

    The spectrum Verizon proposes to auction has been called the “beachfront property” of the airwaves because it makes it easy to build a wireless broadband network with good coverage.

    Verizon bought the rights to use the frequencies from the government for $4.4 billion in 2008. They were formerly used by UHF TV stations and cover areas like New York City, Washington, Philadelphia, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, Los Angeles and Miami.

    Verizon is keeping a larger, nationwide swatch of spectrum it bought in the same auction. It’s using that for its “4G LTE” network, which went live a year and a half ago.

    Verizon spokeswoman Robin Nicol denied that the auction is designed to get regulators at the Federal Communications Commission and Justice Department to approve the spectrum deals with the cable companies and Leap. If those transactions go through, Verizon doesn’t need the licenses it plans to auction, she said.

    [Read: FCC Should Allow Verizon, AT&T a Fair Bid for Wireless Spectrum.]

    “We wanted to put these licenses in the hands of other carriers who could use them, for the benefit of their customers,” she said.

    One of the companies that might be interested in the spectrum is No. 2 carrier AT&T Inc., which has been building its own LTE network in adjacent bands.

    An AT&T spokesman said the company has no comment on Verizon’s proposal…

  8. JRamage says:

    Checked out the post on Simple Dollar… glad to see some people are learning to tell apples from oranges.

    Economics 101: Utilities must hold a dominant market share to spread fixed costs across as many consumers are possible.

    Besides, some of these stats are clearly uneducated: 180+ “alternate” U.S. Providers? Those guys merely lease bandwidth from the main four.

    52% increase in average annual bill since 2006? Voice/text was ~$45 in 2006. If anything, same service is cheaper today. Increase is due to smartphone/data plan offerings.

    Of course, no mention of the 2-3% net margins Verizon and AT&T “enjoy.”

    As for these “unlimited” data plans, worth considering how much you’ll actually be able to use when your connection is intermittent on a good day. As with everything else in economics, many consumers find that paying more is actually the better deal. 4G towers ain’t free, after all.