site Search:


 
   
story category
Study: Arkansas The Most Competitive Broadband State
Wealth, home value, population and competition
by Karl Bode Monday 26-Apr-2010 tags: competition · business · stats
Arkansas is the most competitive broadband state in the country, according to a new study by ID Insight and broadband consultant Craig Settles. The researchers found that while States like North Dakota, California, South Carolina and Nebraska were competitive, States like Rhode Island, Hawaii, Colorado and Maryland were not. Surprising nobody, the study found that a very large number of States see limited competition due to large incumbent duopolies -- though there are some other surprises worth noting.

Click for full size
According to the study authors, they found a strong correlation between income and home value and how much competition was to be found in each state. The study found that as income and home values increase from state to state, the level of competition decreases.

Settles and company also found that States with the largest percentage of Internet users and highest available speeds tend to be less competitive. For instance, a state like Delaware that consistently ranks as one of the fastest states in the country with an average speed of 7.6 Mbps (according to Akamai data) ranks as one of the least competitive states in the country.

Why? In two words: incumbent dominance. "In more prosperous states where there are many users, and more wealth, this tended to attract the largest providers," concludes the study. "As infrastructure was enabled and larger providers began to dominate markets, it became increasingly difficult for new entrants to establish themselves."

In Rhode Island, one carrier enjoys a 78% market share (though the report doesn't say so, it's Cox Communications), while the second biggest carrier in the State (Verizon) enjoys a 17% market share. In Arkansas the top ISP enjoys just a 30% market share, followed by five other ISPs that see at least a 10% market share each.

The study also found that the bulk of broadband stimulus funding did not go to states with the least competitive environments.

view: topics flat text 
Post a:

fAcEtIOUs
Premium
join:2002-03-03
kudos:4

1 edit

Fastest states least competitive ?

That is an interesting fact, if true & the study is accurate. I guess if I had to choose between a state with fast broadband(but higher prices) and a competitive state with lower speeds and lower prices, I'd choose the less competitive state every time.

Also, this study puts the FCC's broadband plan priorities in a bind. If the FCC opts for improving competition, then they will be sending money to states with the best speeds and coverage already in the hope of lowering prices. But if they are sending money to already competitive states, prices won't drop, but they just maybe will improve speeds. It will be interesting to see which outcome has a higher priority at the FCC.
--
Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC?
sonicmerlin

join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
kudos:1

Re: Fastest states least competitive ?

said by fAcEtIOUs:

That is an interesting fact, if true & the study is accurate. I guess if I had to choose between a state with fast broadband(but higher prices) and a competitive state with lower speeds and lower prices, I'd choose the less competitive state every time.
I would choose the solution that results in getting both the positives and none of the negatives: forced line sharing.

fAcEtIOUs
Premium
join:2002-03-03
kudos:4

3 edits

Re: Fastest states least competitive ?

said by sonicmerlin:

said by fAcEtIOUs:

That is an interesting fact, if true & the study is accurate. I guess if I had to choose between a state with fast broadband(but higher prices) and a competitive state with lower speeds and lower prices, I'd choose the less competitive state every time.
I would choose the solution that results in getting both the positives and none of the negatives: forced line sharing.
That is, the statist big government over-regulate solution.
--
Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC?
sonicmerlin

join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
kudos:1

Re: Fastest states least competitive ?

said by fAcEtIOUs:

said by sonicmerlin:

said by fAcEtIOUs:

That is an interesting fact, if true & the study is accurate. I guess if I had to choose between a state with fast broadband(but higher prices) and a competitive state with lower speeds and lower prices, I'd choose the less competitive state every time.
I would choose the solution that results in getting both the positives and none of the negatives: forced line sharing.
That is, the statist big government over-regulate solution.
I know you don't believe that. You in fact know that your own statement is not true. Every informed person in the industry without pro-carrier bias openly believes that forced line-sharing is a real solution that leads to real competition wherever it has been enforced.

The best example of line-sharing's effectivenss has always been Free.fr in France, which offers a triple play for $40/month, and simply would not exist without line-sharing.

In fact there was a huge surge in broadband investment and an increase in competitors in the first few years after the '96 Telecom Act. Things have become increasingly bleak ever since the Republican FCC gutted the Act.

You know this better than most. You simply choose to lie about the truth to others.
nasadude

join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

Re: Fastest states least competitive ?

and let's not forget the recent Harvard (that liberal-leaning, commie bastion of progressive thought) study commissioned by the FCC (and promptly ignored after release) that concluded the exact same thing - line-sharing would result in an increase in competition, which is needed because most areas in the U.S. have little or no competition.
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1
said by fAcEtIOUs:

That is, the statist big government over-regulate solution.
Do you support any person being able to freely run a cable along any public road with no government impediments?
Mele20
Premium
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI
kudos:4
Heh. I'm from Arkansas but have lived in Hawaii for a very long time. Broadband in my Arkansas home town is quite limited...basically the local cable company which is not one of the big cable providers.

As for the FCC sending money to states with the best speed and coverage...well Hawaii ranks as the LEAST COMPETITIVE in the study. Property values are quite high here but speed...it SUCKS. Currently top speed is 5mbps down and 1mbps up. If you live in a FEW AREAS of Oahu you can get Turbo at 8mbps down but nowhere on the neighbor islands. Oceanic Time Warner is planning to give us a much needed speed boost probably to either 8 or 10mbps down at the end of this year. But for a study to claim that faster speeds are in states with less competition that makes zero sense and I don't believe that is true. It is certainly not true in those states where the main provider is Time Warner.
--
When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. Thomas Jefferson

inteller
Sociopaths always win.

join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK
this entire study is horseshit. If this were true then my parents wouldn't be stuck with 256k service with the company from hell known as CenturyLink.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service
Spoken like a true wealthy American.... However, many working families cannot afford $70, $80, a month just for broadband. Even if it's "Fastest".

We need competition to bring prices down and services up.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000

Can anyone else donwnoad the report?

I get the following error when I try and download the report.

error '8004020f'
/broadbandcompetition_confirm.asp, line 107

fAcEtIOUs
Premium
join:2002-03-03
kudos:4

2 edits

Re: Can anyone else donwnoad the report?

said by battleop:

I get the following error when I try and download the report.

error '8004020f'
/broadbandcompetition_confirm.asp, line 107
Try this link to read report without registering:
»www.idinsight.com/documents/IDIn···port.pdf

P.S.>> The company MOVED the doc to hide it without registering. But Giagom has it here:
»gigaom.files.wordpress.com/2010/···inal.pdf
--
Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC?

Uncle Paul

join:2003-02-04
USA
kudos:1

South Carolina competative?

Really? I have a choice of Comcast or ATT 3mb DSL. I didn't realize I was basking in the rays of high competition.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

Re: South Carolina competative?

According to the incumbents, you're doing great!

toddbs98

join:2000-07-08
North Little Rock, AR

Where is this competition?

I'd like to know where this competition is they are talking about. Have the choice between one cable company and one phone company for broadband. This isn't really competition and certainly no more than anywhere else.
--
Patriots always speak of dying for their country never killing for it. Bertrand Russell

jchambers28

join:2007-05-12
Alma, AR
Reviews:
·Cox HSI
·Cox VOIP

Re: Where is this competition?

said by toddbs98:

I'd like to know where this competition is they are talking about. Have the choice between one cable company and one phone company for broadband. This isn't really competition and certainly no more than anywhere else.
I totally agree with you I live in Alma AR and the choices here are cox and century link where is the competition it is certainly not here.
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1
The study assumes competition means an even distribution of customers among the top 10 ISPs in each state. It has nothing to do with how many ISPs are available to each customer.
Necronomikro

join:2005-09-01
Study authors are idiots and assume that the more ISPs in the state means more competition, even though each one just has their own little section carved out.

BF69
Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN

Bullshit

having a lot of providers doesn't mean it's competitive. I suspect most of the ISPs are the ONLY ones serving a particular area. look at this way. If Comcast, Charter, Cox and Time Warner were all in one state would that mean cable TV in competitive in that state? No. WHY? Because as we all know each cable company would be the ONLY cable TV provider in their areas of service. Anyone can twist the numbers any way they want to.

battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000

Re: Bullshit

Wow, we agree on something.

All this tells us is that there is a higher number of Phone Companies and Cable companies in AR than RI.

Bill Dollar

join:2009-02-20
New York, NY

Re: Bullshit

Agreed. This is the dumbest thing I've seen in a while. The number of companies at the state level does not matter at all, because broadband is a local market.
patcat88

join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1

BS like all reports

I have a feeling, like all statistics, this is bunk.

Without reading the report, I belive their definition of "competitiveness" is the distribution of broadband subscribers among that state's ISPs. If a state with each county having an independent cable co, was compared to a 80% Comcast or 80% Time Warner state, the study would say the state with each county having its own independent cable co was "more competitive". Which is total BS because all cable cos have monopoly franchises and NEVER compete with each other. Same thing with ILECs, if each CO or each county had a mom and pop ILEC, thats not competition, because THEY DONT COMPETE!

My hypothesis on why poorer states have more faux-competition is, the ARPU of their customers, or profitability of their customers, is so low the national broadband ISPs (Comcast, Time Warner, Charter, Cox, Centurylink, Windstream, etc) have no reason to buy the 1 county big cable co or buy the independent county big ILEC since adding them would just lower their profit margin % statistics.

fAcEtIOUs
Premium
join:2002-03-03
kudos:4

3 edits

Re: BS like all reports

»www.idinsight.com/documents/IDIn···port.pdf
P.S.>> The company MOVED the doc to hide it without registering. But Gigaom has it here: »gigaom.files.wordpress.com/2010/···inal.pdf
Here is their methodology:
Our Methodology in Detail
Because BroadBand Scout tracks actual Internet usage at the household level, we can begin to assess how this rolls up at any level of geography. When we considered competition at a state level, we adopted the following methodology:
• The first thing we did was to identify the top 10 broadband carriers for each state plus the District of Columbia. In every state analyzed, we observed that after the first few largest carriers that market share quickly drops into the single digits, with the maximum market share of the 10th largest carrier only being 3%.
• The next step was to determine what would constitute the most competitive environment. For this, we chose to structure our view to evaluate uniform distribution. That is, in the most competitive situation, we said that the top 10 carriers would have equal (or 10%) market share amongst these competitors.
• As states become “top heavy” or more monopolized, they tend to stray further and further away from this most competitive or equal share situation.
• To measure this difference between "actual market share" and "most competitive market share," we used a derivative of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for uniformity. This involved measuring the maximum difference observed between the cumulative distributions of providers' actual market shares and the most competitive market share.
• Therefore, states with a large difference are less competitive and those with smaller differences are more competitive.
• This statistic or measurement was then used to rank each state with regard to their competition.
Once this metric was established, we were then able to look at ancillary state-level factors such as average income, Internet usage, actual speed and many other state-level attributes to determine if there were any trends or correlations with their competitive environment.
It doesn't look like a measurement of how many different ISPs an individual customer could buy from entered in to their evaluation of competitiveness.
--
Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC?
nasadude

join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

Re: BS like all reports

this methodology appears to ignore the point that BF69 makes:

areas of service (especially for cablecos) tend not to overlap.

If your state had 10 cablecos, each with 10% market share, but no overlap whatsoever in territory(ie, don't compete with another provider in their area), does that mean the state has "competitive" broadband?

I'm pretty sure it won't seem that way for consumers.

CJSettles

@airband.net
If you read our report, we make it very clear that we took market share data for each state and did the analysis. When we look at market share data by county or down further to city levels, the picture often changes noticeably. Both Adam (ID Insight president) and I (Craig Settles) agree that a company with 10% or 15% market share in the state can have zero presence in many of the counties.

The report is a high-level look at states that presents one benchmark (of which there may be many) so we can then have a discussion about competition within a context people understand. We don't say that even the states that rank high on the list have "the best" competitive situation. We say they have the most even distribution of market share (one definition of a competitive environment) compared to other states.

fAcEtIOUs
Premium
join:2002-03-03
kudos:4

Re: BS like all reports

said by CJSettles :

If you read our report, we make it very clear that we took market share data for each state and did the analysis. When we look at market share data by county or down further to city levels, the picture often changes noticeably. Both Adam (ID Insight president) and I (Craig Settles) agree that a company with 10% or 15% market share in the state can have zero presence in many of the counties.

The report is a high-level look at states that presents one benchmark (of which there may be many) so we can then have a discussion about competition within a context people understand. We don't say that even the states that rank high on the list have "the best" competitive situation. We say they have the most even distribution of market share (one definition of a competitive environment) compared to other states.
I read the report. You are providing macro level competitive analysis at the state level and maybe soon at the county level. But most people don't consider that competition. Competition is only meaningful at the individual level. That is, how many choices do I HAVE at my residence? 1 is no competition; 2 is minimal competition; 3 or more starts to be real competition.

So a more meaningful stat would be what percentage of the households in a state &/or county have 3(or preferably more) options at their location.
--
Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC?

ScottB

@cgocable.net

Least competitive ...

Interesting to note that one of the least competitive states is also enjoying some of the highest average broadband speeds.
Mr Matt

join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
kudos:1
Reviews:
·CenturyLink
·Comcast
·Embarq Now Centu..
·Millenicom

Huh?

What have insight personnel been been smoking? In Lake and Orange Counties, Florida I assume that we are considered to have competition because some communities are served by Brighthouse, others by Comcast and others by Florida Cable. In some areas consumers may lucky enough to have a choice of Broadband via Cable or CenturyLink DSL.
questionable

join:2005-10-18
Phoenix, AZ

Arizona

WOW Arizona is very very close to the bottom

tubbynet
reminds me of the danse russe
Premium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ

Re: Arizona

said by questionable:

WOW Arizona is very very close to the bottom
in so many ways. thats just arizona's sop.

q.
--
"...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..."

Ericthorn
It only hurts when I laugh
Premium
join:2001-08-10
Paragould, AR
Reviews:
·Paragould.net

Competition?

By competition they must mean that my 60$/mo for 'Business Class' cable (2mb down/512k up that JUST got upgraded to 4mb down after 6yrs) is good since I have no other 'feasible' options.

I suppose I could get satellite, or use Sprint's 3G wireless. If AT&T would get their friggin' act together they could blanket this town in 6mb down/40$mo DSL, but as of now with just 1 CO barley anyone in town can get it.
--
Ever try stuffing a melted marshmallow up a wildcat's ass? It can be done, but you have to like your job. - This Is The Way The World Ends by James Morrow - Join a DC club, it can't hurt you!

CJSettles

@airband.net

To put some context on things

Hello,

As one of the authors of the report, I am happy to see the feedback and encourage more. So does Adam, my co-author. You should read this post on my blog that adds context to our thinking expressed in the report, and addresses some of the questions posed here - »roisforyou.wordpress.com/2010/04···to-deal/.

A most important point is that our report looks at state market share. We fully acknowledge in the report and elsewhere that our data shows very different pictures of competitiveness when you look that market share at the county level.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: To put some context on things

Though I applaud your efforts, I must ask: why put out the report if you know that it has major discrepancies in the very point you are trying to make?

As noted, if a state has 10 providers each sharing 10% it would look like competitive nirvana there. However, if each of those 10 were serving completely different people and not actually competing for the same consumers then your report is completely false and misleading.

Competition means there are multiple companies (not just 1 or 2 or even 3 in many cases) trying to win over the consumer that is easily able to switch between them. Do a report on that county by county and then compare it to your income, housing, and whatever other stats you want. Then and only then will you see what lack of competition there is in a vast majority of this country.

Bill Dollar

join:2009-02-20
New York, NY

Re: To put some context on things

Agreed, while I appreciate Mr. Settles work and commentary elsewhere, this report should have never been published. It is meaningless, to the point of being misleading, and tells us (and the reporters who wrote about it) nothing about the *TRUE* state of competition at the local level.

Z80A
Premium
join:2009-11-23

2 edits

And R.I. was near the top of the speed list

Seems competition and speed don't go hand in hand, but topography and population distribution do.
jakkwb

join:2009-04-27
USA

Arkansas service

Well, In my small Arkansas town, I have Suddenlink cable, and ATT DSL to compete with (cannot on price or performance, yet....)

Also - there are no less than three different WISPs that I can pick up at various locations within my service envelope, which is about a 15 mile radius from my town.

All this in addition to Verizon and ATT cel Internet service.

Yes, I have competition.

backwoodsAR

@sbcglobal.net

Ha! "Competitive" my #@$%!

I live in Arkansas, and I can tell you that this state is NOT competitive for broadband. Everyone wants it. Nobody is offering it. My residence? No broadband available... at all. Only thing I can get here is 3g (which is now limited to 5gig per month--one download can exceed that). Luckily I have line of sight to my office that DOES have DSL coverage (still no cablemodem provider there) so I at least have broadband thanks to a pair of wireless radios. The competition there? We can get att's 3meg per month... or one of 3 other companies that resell att's dsl line... at double the cost and half the speed.

The research company needs to take into account several more metrics: broadband penetration rates and availability, population density broken, as well as 3g/cellular penetration and dial-up ISP customer penetration--all broken down by rural vs metro. Then you will see that Arkansas has a fairly high percentage of population in RURAL areas with NO broadband available.

I live in a county with 3, count them THREE different cable companies. None of which offer service in another's area. Of those, one (which covers all rural parts of the county) refuses to upgrade anything or offer broadband. The local channels through them was WORSE than using an outside antenna to receive the same channel. The other two cable companies (both of which have broadband offerings) have service for the two cities in the area... and neither one is the least bit interested in expanding their service area outside of city limits.
gopnick

join:2005-01-07
Benton, AR

Arkansas

I am one of those Arkansans fortunate enough to have a WISP, a cable company, DSL and at least 3 forms of 3G cellular data available at my residence. While most in my subdivision opt for AT&T's slow speeds of 3/1.5 mbps (12 if you are among the lucky few who can get Uverse) I am willing to pay far more ($57/mo) to get 25/3 cable Internet.

Since the 1950s, Arkansas' population has been shifting from rural areas to urban and suburban population centers. It has also shifted in pure geography; the entire population is moving west and north (towards Little Rock and Fayetteville). The result is a much less rural population than years past--and indeed, a more competitive broadband market as a result.

I would also add one other thing: though the authors of this report have taken a fair amount of criticism regarding their methodology, they also have not tried to hide a darn thing. There may also be some validity to their methods. People can (and do!) make a decision on where to live based on a variety of factors, broadband access included. As consumers become more educated, the ability to attain faster speeds at lower prices may sway people from living in one town or suburb over another. This may seem far-fetched, but I can honestly say that I use that as a metric when looking at homes and property. I know others here who do the same. Not all are incredibly tech-savvy, either. Therefore, when two towns right next to one another have a combined four broadband providers, some minimal competition is provided inherently based on residents' ability to choose one town or subdivision over another.

Personally, I would like to see broadband providers listed in RLS searches. That is a pipe dream, I know.

Van
Premium
join:2009-07-08
New Orleans, LA

I doubt competition will be improving that

much in the near future either. I expect the big players to continue reaching out and continue giving millions to politicians so they can cut off any local/smaller companies from fighting with them

If you can't compete with them, eliminate them....I guess

Thursday, 24-May 05:15:50 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.