

A 100mbs connection in Stockholm is $11 a month - quoderat
http://cis471.blogspot.com/2009/04/why-is-connectivty-in-stockholm-so-much.html

======
noss
The price $11 is probably the best market price they managed to find in
Stockholn. It is not like you only need to pay $11 a month and you will get
100Mbps wherever you live in Stockholm. It is not socialism that gets you
100Mbps in Stockholm (but silly simpleton republicans: it is NOT NOT-socialism
that gets it either). Sweden has always been ahead on telecom and we happen to
think it is important.

The municipal owned black-fibre company is <http://www.stokab.se/>

For some sample prices: I currently pay 320 SEK for 10/10 Ethernet (my condo
is 3 years old and is wired, but on a 5 year lock-in contract with the company
that wired the condo). The cable company offers 8/24 for 319 SEK. No deal.

A friend of mine gets 10/100 for 239 SEK, also ethernet. It is rental apt,
they all have been wired by the owners to stay competitive / attractive. This
is quite common. Another variant is that the power-company wires apartments
with ethernet. A collegue has that and gets 10/10 at 195 SEK or 100/100 at 235
SEK. This is usually combined with freedom to select operator, who bundles
various non-internet services over wires, such as digital-tv or phone (and as
such they compete with price AND service bundle).

If your house hasnt been ethernet wired you're stuck on ADSL or cable modems,
and the price level is around 200-400 SEK (this is typically bundled with
digital-tv and phone as well).

Most of the end-user prices that are in par with the $11 from the article are
lucky bastards. One collegue pays 89 SEK a month for 100/100 ethernet, which
is less than $11 with current exchange rates. His condo owns the last-mile
wiring and can chose the lowest-bidding operator to connect them to inet.

In two years my condo's 5 year contract have expired, our last-mile wiring is
ours to control, and I too hope to be in a similar sweet spot to chose the
lowest bidder.

------
jpcx01
Good deal. I'll pay 20k a year extra in taxes, but I'll save 30 bucks a month
off internet

~~~
derefr
That's not the compromise. You pay 20k a year extra in taxes, and save 30
bucks a month on _pretty much every service you could be spending 30 bucks a
month on_. It adds up, especially when you consider that some things that
you'd pay less for here are just of absolute crap quality, and you'd likely
pay to upgrade here (like, say, paying for extra medical coverage) to take you
to the _base_ "free" level provided there.

~~~
dantheman
Unless you don't want that service and are therefore subsidizing it for
everyone else.

~~~
sho
Oh god yes, if only I could opt out of that terrible $11 100Mbps internet! How
dare they fulfil their basic governmental mandate to take advantage of natural
economies of scale to offer high quality basic services at a low price.

~~~
dantheman
The real cost isn't 11$, and it's debatable whether there is a government
mandate to take advantage of natural economies of scale. I for one, don't
believe that.

~~~
sho
Got your own private sewerage line hooked up then, do you? Made a deal with a
nearby power company to run some lines down to your house? Paid up your
subscription to the Fire Fighters' Guild?

Delivering basic services _en masse_ is one of the core functions of
government. Everyone going it alone is far less efficient. I struggle to think
of a single example of a situation where organising utitily provisions
individually is a better idea. Internet access is now a utility and it is
being treated as one in progressive countries. How can you argue with that?

~~~
dantheman
If you live outside of major population areas, yes you often have private
water, sewage, and hell in some places you have to opt to pay taxes to a
neighboring towns fire department if you want service. I see nothing wrong
with that. Oh, and lots of cities have private energy and water companies so I
don't see what the problem is there?

Why would you treat internet access differently than you would the telephone?
Also, think of the massive improvement in telephone service once the
government imposed monopoly of AT&T was broken up.

Delivering basic services en masse isn't one of the core functions of
government. The core function of government is national and local
security/justice.

