Harvard study: community-owned broadband prices are up to 50% cheaper than lowest-cost services offered by private ISPs, are more transparent and less confusing
A new study out of Harvard once again makes it clear why incumbent ISPs like Comcast, Verizon and AT&T are so terrified by the idea … Tweets: @greenawakening , @jason_kint , and @leolaporte Tweets: Sara Laughter / @greenawakening : internet access—community-based Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are cheaper and better—new study @Harvard—cable companies reportedly are “terrified by the idea of communities building their own broadband networks” http://motherboard.vice.com/ ... @motherboard Jason Kint / @jason_kint : “But out of the 27 markets where they could make direct comparisons, researchers found that in 23 cases, the community-owned ISPs' pricing was lower when the service costs and fees were averaged over four years.” http://twitter.com/... @leolaporte : Better service. Lower price. No wonder the big telecoms want states to ban community wi-fi. http://motherboard.vice.com/ ...
Context & Ripple Effects
The Harvard pricing study lands amid a small wave of community-network momentum: Motherboard had just committed to building its own Brooklyn community internet tied into the NYC mesh, and follow-up reporting counted more than 750 US communities running some form of community-owned broadband. The study gives that movement its strongest economic argument yet — not just that municipal networks exist, but that they beat the cheapest private plans on price and clarity across 27 directly comparable markets.
The counter-movement was already visible too: Big Telecom has lobbied lawmakers to squeeze out new municipal networks so federal broadband dollars flow to large carriers instead. The study matters because it hands pro-municipal advocates a concrete price gap to cite against that lobbying.
First-order effects
- Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T now face published head-to-head comparisons showing their lowest-cost plans run up to 50% above community-owned alternatives in 27 markets, undercutting the incumbents' core argument that private provision is more efficient.
- City councils and cooperatives weighing their own networks get a citable benchmark for what residents could pay, strengthening the case in local referendums and franchise negotiations.
Second-order effects
- Expect incumbent lobbying at the state level to intensify, since preemption laws blocking municipal networks are the cheapest way for AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon to neutralize the price competition the study documents.
- Where municipal builds are legally blocked, pressure shifts to mandated affordability — the model New York's $15–$20/month broadband law set and other states have since copied — as the fallback lever over private ISP pricing.
Third-order effects
- If the pattern holds, US broadband splits into two competing structures: community-owned and cooperative networks setting a price-and-transparency floor, and private carriers defending share through legislation rather than price cuts.
- Pricing transparency itself becomes a regulatory battleground — the same disparity patterns later documented in lower-income neighborhoods suggest disclosure rules will be pushed as a complement to public ownership.
The trend: US broadband is becoming a contest between community-owned networks and incumbent carriers, fought through local referendums, state preemption laws, and federal funding rules rather than through prices alone.