View Single Post
Posts: 289 | Thanked: 560 times | Joined on May 2009 @ Tampere, Finland
#11
Originally Posted by YoDude View Post
What's going on in the UK with 121% saturation?

1. Brits travel between competing carriers coverage areas often and must carry multiple phones in order to insure that they can be "reached."

2. It's popular in England to activate lines on your family plan for your unborn children.

3. Cell phone contracts are so hard to get out of that many have lines they no longer use but still pay for.

or;

4. How many working cell phones someone has clipped to their belt indicates their suitability for mating. It is part of a complex mating ritual in the UK and is sometimes accompanied but the seldom seen ritual "multiple ring tone" dance.

(citations needed )
I don't know about UK, but I can give you a couple of examples from Finland which has 115% penetration according to the graph.

Mobile phones have quickly replaced landlines. 73% of households in Finland don't have a landline anymore. They have effectively been replaced by mobile phones. Every member of the family has one so there's no need for a landline.

The same thing is happening in companies. When you used to have a phone sitting on your desk, you now have mobile phone.

Subscriptions are also not exclusively used for calling people. We have a cottage in Lapland, 1000 kilometers away. It has electricity, but it isn't heated around the year. The cottage has a device with a SIM card that can turn the heating on when a SMS is sent to it. In winter it's nice to be able to turn it on remotely so the cottage is warm when we arrive there.

Originally Posted by quipper8 View Post
Seeing as cellular service has a lot to do with the propagation distance of waves, I assume you could add a set of data to that and show that the less dense the population, the higher the nationwide average cost of cellular coverage. So as people per square mile goes down, average cell phone plan cost goes up. This is just a hypothesis, somebody with more time feel free to do the extrapolation

That link did not have average cost for either canad or australia, both of which are less population dense than US and which I expect would have higher costs
Population densities:

Finland 15,6/sqkm
Sweden 20/sqkm
US 31/sqkm

Now with this data you can check the chart again. Finland and Sweden were the least expensive countries. The population density certainly isn't the only factor to blame.

Last edited by jsa; 2009-08-30 at 01:48.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to jsa For This Useful Post: