I meant absurd in a good way. Given my internet is also powering my professional line of work, I'd still probably pay $80/month for double the speeds. But it's great others can get some actually decent internet for a small fraction of the cost.
Really depends where in CA. I'm in SF and pay ~$50 for 300Mbps (Comcast), but my parents across the Bay get symmetrical 10Gbps (Sonic) for the same price!
They are, yes. But my choices here are basically Comcast or AT&T (yes, I'm in a suburb). I'm just choosing my poison. I was using the comparison as a good thing for NYC rather than trying to criticize them when my internet prices are comparatively bad.
Some good news is that they seemed to have upgraded the speeds to 600Mbps at some point in the last 2 years. Not out of gouging land, but better.
Thats all suburbs with one real provider. I used to pay $160/m for uncapped 200Mbs with Cox. Then Google Fiber came to my neighborhood and now i pay $100m for 2Gbit.
I'm paying $30/mo for 10 Gbps in Japan, paying $100/mo for 400 Mbps sounds crazy.
I get that the last mile infrastructure costs a lot to lay down especially in the U.S. with your crazy local politics, but once that pipe is there the bandwidth to fill it should be cheap.
I'm in Oregon and paying $65/mo for symmetrical 1Gb plan which seems more in line with those prices if you scale them linearly. But I have my choice of multiple providers here, so they compete.
the $20 plan is kinda absurd. I'm in CA, but I'm paying 100/month for a 400 Mbps plan.