One big reason we lack Internet competition: Starting an ISP is really hard
Creating an ISP? You'll need millions of dollars, patience, and lots of lawyers. — There are probably many reasons that US households have so few choices for Internet service, but not least among them is the fact …
Context & Ripple Effects
This piece closes out an arc Ars Technica has been building since late 2013: cities fed up with slow, pricey service began demanding gigabit fiber in November, and December reporting argued that [[a:1200898|lack of competition, not technological barriers, is what keeps gigabit speeds from households]], even as new fiber buildouts showed real competitive benefits for consumers. The open question in all three stories was why more competitors don't simply enter and fix the problem themselves.
First-order effects
- Any city or private investor weighing a new broadband network now confronts the full bill up front: millions of dollars of capital, years of patience, and extensive legal work before the first customer is connected.
Second-order effects
- With independent entry this costly, municipalities become the likeliest challengers — continuing the city-driven gigabit push documented through 2013 — while incumbents' scale advantage over capital-intensive entrants is effectively reinforced.
Third-order effects
- If the entry-barrier pattern holds, US broadband consolidates structurally into a small set of incumbents with little pricing pressure, making public intervention — municipal networks or regulatory action — the main remaining source of competition rather than market entry.
The trend: US broadband is drifting from a market that could self-correct through new entrants toward one where high fixed entry costs entrench incumbents, leaving city-led fiber projects and policy as the primary competitive levers.