Verizon Confirms That Yes, 5G Will Cost You Extra
from the nothing's-shocking dept
By now we've established that while fifth-generation (5G) wireless will result in faster, more resilient networks, the technology has been over-hyped to an almost nauseating degree. Yes, faster, lower latency networks are a good thing, but 5G is not as paradigm-rattling as most wireless carriers and hardware vendors have led many in the press to believe. 5G is more of a useful evolution than a revolution, but it has become the equivalent of magic pixie dust in tech policy circles, wherein if you simply say "it will lead to faster deployment of 5G!" you'll immediately add gravitas to your otherwise underwhelming K Street policy pitch.
Throughout all of the hype, carriers have been really hesitant to discuss what's perhaps the most important question: how much will 5G cost? After all, next-generation connectivity is only going to help boost broadband competition if it's both ubiquitous and affordable, two things the US wireless industry has never really been known for. And now that the carrier lobbyists have effectively convinced the Pai FCC to neuter itself, that question has only become more important.
It's starting to become clear why carriers haven't wanted to much talk about price. AT&T's early offerings haven't been much to write home about. And this week Verizon took the wraps off the pricing for its mobile 5G offerings, noting that consumers will need to pay $10 extra per month across the board if they're interested in using it:
"Verizon has decided to treat its emerging mobile 5G network as a premium service that customers should pay more to access. The company is debuting its mobile 5G network next month at select locations in Chicago and Minneapolis, but customers wishing to use it will need a new phone and a new, costlier plan.
Verizon confirmed its new Mobile 5G service will require a new premium unlimited plan, starting at $85. That is $10 more than Verizon’s current GoUnlimited plan. Customers will also need a Motorola Moto Z3 phone — currently the only model compatible with Verizon’s 5G network, and a special 5G Moto Mod attachment, sold separately."
In other words, 5G will cost you extra. Which isn't surprising if you've watched Verizon at all over the last decade or two.
Granted some will try and claim that Verizon should charge more due to the high costs of 5G deployment. That ignores the fact that US consumers already pay some of the highest prices for 4G LTE mobile data in the developed world. That also ignores that Verizon just nabbed incalculable countless billions from the Trump tax cuts and a litany of policy favors from the FCC, money the company has already acknowledged won't be put back into the network. That money was, if you have a memory, supposed to go toward significant new jobs and network investment, according to Verizon.
Verizon's charging more because it doesn't believe it will be adequately punished by competitors for doing so. And it doesn't worry about competition because while the wireless sector (including T-Mobile) talks a good game, they still usually refuse to seriously compete on price. And with the looming Sprint and T-Mobile merger preparing to reduce the total number of major competitors in the space from four to three, that's not getting better anytime soon.
That brings us to the other major question users should be asking about 5G. In a post net neutrality landscape where the FCC no longer seriously has the authority to hold wireless carriers accountable, what kind of annoying restrictions will be placed on these lines? Verizon (who already charges some "unlimited" data customers more to stream video in HD) hasn't affixed any on these early 5G markets yet, but should the FCC win its looming lawsuit over the net neutrality repeal, all bets are off.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Are you arguing for the government fixing pricing of broadband services?
I can’t quite understand what you are arguing FOR. A broadband industry takeover? Government controller internet access and pricing? Pricing set by YOU?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Exposing predatory pricing doesn't mean calling for government regulation. Just making it known as a bogus charge is a good first step.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"Exposing predatory pricing doesn't mean calling for government regulation"
Even if it does, effective regulation doesn't mean what AC thinks it means.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Ok, maybe I am a simpleton in this area. “Predatory Pricing”?
Isn’t it the mission of EVERY business to charge AS MUCH as possible?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Isn’t it the mission of EVERY business to charge AS MUCH as possible?"
Yup, apparently it is. Just have a look at pharma bro. Isn't he in jail?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
He is, but sadly not for the act of overcharging on lifesaving medicine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Predatory Pricing
Arguing for or against government regulation is kind of irrelevant when the business exists and has limited competition explicitly because of government controls. Because the government does not allow anyone to put up whatever towers they want, using whatever frequency they want, it is incumbent on the government to ensure those who do resell the limited bandwidth do not charge an excessive amount.
Presumably, the need for network upgrades should be figured into the price of the existing service already.
the other problem is - great, faster service? Other than streaming 4K video on devices barely big enough to make HD relevant is more overkill that it is "providing a service"... what good is faster service? The only advantage I see is servicing more clients in a timely manner - ie. service in crowds like sports events.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Predatory Pricing
Don't forget the billions in tax-payer payouts to these greedy bastards.
They were given enough to fully deploy and operate 5G years ago.
They used all of that up by giving their corporate fucks bonuses.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Predatory Pricing
"Arguing for or against government regulation is kind of irrelevant .."
Yeah - I was arguing for government control - LOL not.
But that's ok, please continue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Predatory Pricing
This allows for fixed 5g broadband solutions, which for people in rural areas would be a large plus.. I don't think 5g is all about mobile devices.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
To an extent, sure. But, the government sometimes has to step in when corporations are abusing their power. This does not mean price setting or running the business for them, but rather ensuring that the market is fair where normal market forces aren't going to settle themselves. Predatory pricing on utilities fits into that category.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
How does this article promote the concept of “ensuring that the market is fair”?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
How does it not? The entire article is about how there will not be a fair market if they are left to their own devices.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
But but .... the market is self regulating they said
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Exposing where the market is clearly unfair is very often the first step. You inform the people who then do things like protest against the unfair practices.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Since when did the act of pointing out a problem have to come bundled with a solution?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Unfortunately, yes, that is the culture. However, given the criminal lack of competition, markets won't fix anything.
Further... considering the billions these companies have taken for buildout, without doing any, one may imagine the people, via their hand known as government, might reasonably take an action demanding the money back, buildout without rate increases, setting rates, or some other action.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Tax cuts are corporate welfare, and if you get welfare the government should be able to regulate you. Otherwise you can pony up the full amount, thank you very much.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I am willing to bet that not only is the "5G" service going up but they will raise the 4G plans too "To help pay for improvements"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I don't use 4G yet, why do I need 5G.
Well, I need it because the phone companies tell me that I do - lol.
Suckers out there paying 2k for a new friggin spy device that spams yer ass with lies and bullshit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"I am willing to bet that not only is the "5G" service going up but they will raise the 4G plans too "To help pay for improvements""
Or, 4G service will suddenly start to degrade forcing people that need it to go to 5G. That will help pay for improvements.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
That's exactly how they got me for 4G - 3G suddenly degraded enough that I couldn't use my old 3G phone but perhaps ten percent of the time. Given they did that to force folks like me to go to 4G, this will be the game plan to force us to 5G in the next few years.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Well, at least we have the FCC on our side to protect us from crap like tha...oh well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So what will the new term be?
As they price themselves out of the reach of many, what will they call them?
There isn't a cord to cut...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So what will the new term be?
How about spectrum pollution? No newcomers can compete with them so long as they own the available spectrum.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A cellphone tied to a Comcast subscription costs $11 a month.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
What does the subscription cost?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
All your personal information. And your soul if you don't want them to degrade your Netflix connection
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What do 5G providers in other countries charge? Is it considered a premium service in Canada or Mexico? What about in more distant markets like Japan and China?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"What do 5G providers in other countries charge?"
The problem is, to make a meaningful comparison, you have to define "5G" first, which is nowhere near done settled yet. It's a marketing term thus far, not something that's settled into an actual definition.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Thank you! I keep pointing that out.
Selling "5g" should fall under FTC condemnation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Okay, so what I'm trying to find out from Techdirt's very global readership is what wireless operators in their country charge for service equivalent to what Verizon is selling as 5g.
Or are you trying to say that Bode's concern is premature?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
No, I'm saying that there is no meaningful way of comparing them so far, since there's no globally recognised definition. There may actually not be much similarity between the services at all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You can't say "Verizon sells X mbps with Y latency for $85 and you can get something slightly better or worse from country Z for $50? Does the 5G moniker really matter? Isn't performance the most important thing?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"You can't say "Verizon sells X mbps with Y latency for $85 and you can get something slightly better or worse from country Z for $50?"
I can, but you're moving the goalposts now. Your original question was about 5G, and the answer to that is that not only has nobody decided on a standard, most countries haven't rolled out their version of it yet.
Google is available if you need to price compare under whatever criteria you make up in your head, but the above is the answer to the question you asked.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And with the looming Sprint and T-Mobile merger preparing to reduce the total number of major competitors in the space from four to three, that's not getting better anytime soon.
Bode, there is no competition in this market, so please stop whining about the damn merger already.
Every single wireless company charges the same $69.99/mo for the first account setup, not including special offers.
That's not competition.
That's price fixing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That does sound like price fixing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cell service in this country is already way too expensive. So why price it higher for 5G. Not unexpected for Verison. I would say, why do you need 5G on your phone anyway? So you can download an app a few seconds faster? I can already stream just fine with current speeds.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Reasons I decided to #Walkaway
When Hate crimes that were Front Page news became Back Page news if they turned out to be fake.
When Obama brought up police brutality at the funeral of murdered police officers in Dallas.
When Marxism is celebrated even though it murdered 100 million people in the last century.
When identity politics became more valid than having an argument.
When you can publicly demonize white males to the point of celebrating them becoming “extinct” (literally something a friend told me).
I’m so happy I walked away and as the Left delves deeper into identify politics and socialism, there’s ZERO chance I’ll be walking back.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
That's a nice set of strawmen you have there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Well, since #walkaway has been confirmed to be the latest inflfuence scam being spread by Russia's bots, did you really expect any better?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I've seen that hashtag mentioned a few times in chat, but never with enough context to get what it was, mind explaining?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Basically, the model is:
Liar/troll claims to recently be a former leftist/democrat
Claims they believed in some of the good things democrats/left stand for
Says they chose the other side because [insert variable amount of debunked pants-on-head bullshit claims against democrats/left (see above for examples)]
It was started by a right-wing hairstylist, but has been since been picked up mainly by Kremlinbots, and many pictures of these "Screw humanity and human rights, I'm a Republican now" 'Democrats' have been found to be stock photos.
https://www-cnn.com/2018/07/17/opinions/russian-bots-2018-midterm-elections-opinion-love/ind ex.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WalkAway_campaign
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Ah, I think a few of those actually popped into the comments a while back actually, though they seem to have quickly buggered right off after the trio(at least) of comments they left.
Thanks, nice to have that explained.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
What does any of this have to do with Verizon's "5g" plans?
And where did you "walk" that none of that now has bearing on you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
He saw the word "government" being used positively and decided to roll out a tired set of paranoid talking points that don't bear any real relation to reality. It's sadly pretty common.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Shiva Ayyadurai still didn't invent email, Hamilton.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Because people are willing to pay more.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Blu-ray will cost you more."
Blu-ray is next to dead 'cause DVD was good enough for most people. And, of course, streaming has replaced both for a lot of people. When HD channels started showing up, they were "extra". When SD was pushed out by HD, the price increases just stayed in place.
5G pricing is just a permanent, significant price increase for relatively minor technical enhancements.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wireless Technology
Thank you for shreing the informative article with, I like to share one for source related this topic: https://citygoldmedia.com/category/tech/wireless-mobile/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wireless Technology
Interesting article. I found the vlan section interesting. I did something similar with my WAPs but never thought about it on cellular. I like how it talks about how infrastructure will be far cheaper and Verizon is raising their rates.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Then lets add the caps...
aND CUT YOU DONW TO 4G, THEN TO 3G..
(sorry, hand needs operation)
Its the same as what they have NOW.. Go watch that movie at 1080, and find out how many you will get in 1 month, before they CUT YOU BACK..
To bad they dont do this to Phone calls for 15 year old girls..
Or those in cars/trucks, and other uses to GET OFF THE PHONE, PAY ATTENTION, BUS turns corner and idiot Yaking away on the phone gets hit..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]