“Averages don’t always reveal the most telling realities. You know , Shaquille O’Neal and I have an average height of 6 feet.” – former U.S. Labor Secretary, Robert Reich.

---

We continue to get new data that helps spell out the state of broadband in America, but sometimes we have to sift through the numbers to see what’s actually being captured.

While some coverage of this week’s FCC Report on Broadband Internet Access Services seems to have opted for a glass half-empty approach, (“more than two-thirds (68%) of… U.S. broadband connections tracked were too slow… to technically qualify as high-speed service”), there’s a decidedly different story if you look more closely at the numbers.

First, the report focuses on what broadband speeds consumers elect to purchase, not on availability. Second, the Report includes all available means to connect to the Internet – including wireless and DSL – in addition to fiber and cable broadband deployments.

Cable broadband is available to 93% of U.S. households, offering speeds of 5 Mbps or faster to more than 90% of U.S. households. With continued investment in the rollout of ultra-fast access built on DOCSIS 3.0, the future will only get brighter for those consumers with the need for speed. A report earlier this year forecast that D3 would reach approximately 92% of homes by 2013.

The Report’s findings do mean that many consumers have higher speeds available to them but are opting to subscribe to lower speed tiers. In part, this is just a reflection of the choices that are available. While cable is busy deploying faster speeds, we offer multiple options. Some people elect to connect to the Internet through their mobile devices. Others to want to save money by opting for slower connections. It’s important to make sure that consumers can select the scenario that works best for their needs.

As we all work together to promote broadband adoption and to expand the reach and capabilities of next-generation broadband networks, it’s good to get beyond the averages of the marketplace and take stock of some of the good news.

There’s a video of Louis C.K. that’s been floating around the Internet for the past two years called “Everything’s Amazing and Nobody’s Happy.” In an appearance on Late Night with Conan O’Brien, the comedian observed that despite our technological advances, people still like to complain.

I think about this when I hear people complain bitterly that the U.S. is dangerously behind on broadband – there’s not enough broadband available, it’s too slow, it’s too expensive. Nobody can get online!

Of course, we have to ensure that as many Americans as possible have access to the Internet. Read this February post from Kyle McSlarrow or this one from James Assey in March. The cable industry has deployed broadband to 92% of American households. We continue to regularly increase broadband speeds and we’re rolling out wideband service based on the DOCSIS 3.0 standard (now reaching 65+ million homes). We proposed the Adoption Plus program to bring broadband to lower income households.

This is a time when:

• 95% of U.S. households have availability to Internet access with speeds of 4 Mbps or more
• 82% of HHs can choose from two or more wireline platforms
• More than 90% can choose from several 3G mobile options

Internet access is important. We can and should do more to get Americans connected. But are we really so bad off?

I Don’t Think We’ve Surrendered to Sweden.

Last month, we blogged about how high consumer satisfaction is with their current Internet connections, but all you’ll hear is about how slow our connections are.  Surveys show that an increasing number of people are using mobile devices to access the Web, but some wouldn’t count those consumers when measuring “broadband.”

Adam Theirer pointed out last year that the speed of adoption for Internet access is far faster than other technology developments (See this Pew report). With three-quarters of Americans currently using the Internet, adoption hit 50% in a decade, ahead of multichannel video (35 years), wireless phones (20 years), home computers (20 years), telephone and electricity (50+ years). Are we crawling along or well ahead of schedule?

Nokia Siemens Networks’ annual broadband development index, the Connectivity Scorecard, just came out and it showed that the U.S. just lost the #1 slot to Sweden. Sweden is beating us!

Of course, Sweden’s population is 3% of the U.S. population; it’s 4.57% of our land mass; the Swedish government owns 37% of the incumbent telecom provider (TeliaSonora) and the Finnish government owns another 13%, making the incumbent half-owned by the government.  Still, look at how bad we have it.

It’s not like I can buy a little device for a couple hundred dollars that I can carry around in my pocket and access most of the Internet, anytime and anywhere. It’s not like I can watch one of thousands of movies 24 hours day by firing up my Wii to reach the Netflix library or by tuning to my VOD service. It’s not like I can get on an airplane and fly across the country while surfing the Web.

Oh, wait. Yes, I can.

[NOTE: I should probably mention Louis C.K.'s terrific FX show Louie. And check out George Ou's debunking of the Berkman study – a key tool used to "prove" how the U.S. is behind – here and here.]

While the enormous growth and progress of U.S. broadband over the last decade continues to be under-appreciated by some in Washington, real consumers who use the service everyday continue to express their satisfaction with their service.

The latest data comes via a report from Leichtman Research Group, finding that, “71% of US broadband Internet subscribers are very satisfied with their current Internet service at home.”  On top of that, the report says people are even pleased with the speed of their Internet connection.

If this sounds familiar, the FCC’s own broadband study which we covered here a few weeks ago that said 91% of home broadband users report being at least somewhat satisfied with the speed of their service (with 50% saying they are very satisfied).  Also similar to the FCC’s survey, the Leichtman research notes, “77% of broadband subscribers do not know the download speed of their Internet service at home.”

This last data point raises an interesting question – If consumers are satisfied with their broadband service and it performs the functions they want, is it important to know the exact speed of your home broadband service?

The Institute for Policy Innovation recently tackled this question and raised some interesting analogies:

Can most people rattle off the horsepower of their car or their lawnmower? Can most people even tell you what “horsepower” means? (Horsepower is a measurement of work over time. Move 33,000 pounds one foot in a minute and that is one horsepower). What about their furnace? Can they opine on how many BTUs it produces? (BTU stands for British thermal unit. Heat one pound of 60 degree water by one degree at a pressure equal to one atmosphere and you have one BTU).

I am guessing that people are satisfied with their service because it consistently works, it consistently zips along at a pace that accomplishes what the user is trying to do, and it consistently helps them with school, business and entertainment activities.

It is great news that most consumers are satisfied with their Internet service, but cable is continuing to invest so we can offer even faster Internet speeds and a variety of tiers for consumers to choose the service that best meets their needs.

Cable operators have invested more than $160 billion over the last decade in infrastructure upgrades, maintenance and equipment, but more is happening everyday.  And many cable operators are increasing speeds for customers, often without increasing price.

Ultra-fast Internet – or DOCSIS 3.0 as we know it – was deployed to 52 million homes and business around the country, or 43% of cable’s national footprint, by February 2010.  Offering speeds from 50 to 100Mbps, DOCSIS 3.0 is providing cutting edge services for many homes and businesses now, and well into the future.

The reason why we continue to invest in our network and increase the speeds we’re delivering is to ensure this satisfaction continues.

It’s been more than a year now since I first mentioned deployment of wideband Internet access based on the DOCSIS 3.0 standard. With the use of channel bonding, cable operators are able to offer speeds exceeding 100 Mbps downstream.

The first launch was in the Twin Cities market in April of 2008. Since then, it’s been popping up all over America: Baltimore, Atlanta, Chicago, St. Louis, Boston, Philadelphia, Seattle, Portland, Indiana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York.

Now, Washington, DC will also be benefiting from more robust bandwidth. In May, Cox deployed its Ultimate Internet service to residential and business customers in Northern Virginia. Today, Comcast announced that its Extreme 50 service will be launched in the DC Metro area. The service is first being offered in the Anacostia neighborhood, with the entire area expected to have wideband by year’s end. Most existing high-speed Internet customers will see their speeds double for no additional cost.

Now that cable is the broadband leader in Our Nation’s Capitol, you can look for continued wideband deployment by operators all over the country. Stay tuned!

Earlier this week, Cablevision announced Optimum Online Ultra, a new high-speed Internet product that uses the DOCSIS 3.0 standard to deliver speeds up to 101 Mbps. This is very exciting news, especially when you connect this announcement to the cable operators who have deployed wideband service over the past year – Comcast, Charter and Cox – and those that are planning to deploy in 2009.

And that might be all there is to say about it, but there was a little twist. Our friends over at Verizon seemed really unhappy about the launch. Was it the 101 Mbps that bothered them or the $99 monthly price? At any rate, take a look at this odd post on the Verizon Policy blog.

Besides arguing against the business model for their own FiOS deployment, you’ll note that one of their key complaints is that Cablevision’s 101 Mbps is a “parlor trick” because “there is little evidence of market demand for the speed.” This echoes a PCMag.com argument (referenced in this blog post) that higher speeds are unnecessary: “…no average consumer is going to pony up almost $100 for home broadband service—regardless of speed.”

Now, I’m a little confused here. I seem to remember all these arguments over the past couple years (sarcasm alert) about how horrible it was that consumers in Europe and Asia had so much more bandwidth, while we Americans had to struggle along with our anemic speeds. And now we’re told, “Bah, who really needs that much bandwidth?”

Secondly, Verizon pulls out the long-disproven accusation that cable broadband service is shared bandwidth and so it’s not real. Well, I hate to break it to the fine folks at Verizon, but all bandwidth is shared at some point, even at FiOS. Yes, cable broadband is engineered differently than FiOS is. Cable started deploying modem service about 15 years ago and the intention was always that customers would share bandwidth off a node, but that nodes could be split as needs increased.

Verizon issues a clarion call against “parlor tricks.” Here’s a neat trick for you: If you’re a FiOS customer, with its “all-fiber” service, take a look at the back of your TV or at your modem. You’ll find a piece of coaxial cable, making it a hybrid fiber-coax system. So, wasn’t “fiber optics right to the door, true QAM” a bit of marketing? Especially in light of the fact that cable has generally built its broadband customer base and high penetrations while offering its best services and fastest speeds to the homes passed by its network, while Verizon focuses attention on FiOS’ fast speeds but still offers copper-based DSL service across most of its footprint.

Add the fact that Verizon says that Cablevision “claims” they deployed the service across their footprint (when a Cablevision spokesman confirmed that the service will be available across their service area on May 11) and you get the idea.

But this is competition in action. When Verizon thought they had the edge, they bragged pretty loudly. Some blogs, such as GigaOM and CrunchGear, noted that Verizon seems to be protesting a little too much this time.