> Google is not an ISP for consumers

I mean, it is. They provide internet service, to consumers. They are by definition a consumer ISP.

You might as well say "Google is not a retailer for consumers". Except when they are (Google Shopping Express, Google Play Store, etc)

Not to mention the dozens of other, smaller groups who run ISP's pushing similar speeds, and make it their mainline business.

http://www.vermontel.com/internet https://epbfi.com/internet/ http://www.sumofiber.com/residential_internet https://www.highlandsfibernetwork.com/internet

> does the fact that OnePlus offers the OnePlusOne for $300 (to the few people who can get it) mean that the Galaxy S5, which has similar specs but costs twice as much, is unreasonably priced?

If Samsung had a monopoly on phone sales, so that you were required to purchase a Galaxy S5 (just as most people are required to by Comcast to get any modern internet whatsoever) then yes, it would be fair to say that the S5 is unreasonably priced when compared to a OnePlus.

But their not. Anyone can choose to not purchase a Galaxy S5, and still own a smartphone with a dataplan. You can't choose to not purchase Comcast and still have high speed internet (in most areas).

- -

If Comcast wants to keep their monopoly, they have to submit to regulation on prices and services. (Just like every other utility). If Comcast doesn't want to be regulated, all they have to do is give up their monopoly utility status.

It's fairly cut and dry. They can't have it both ways. They can't keep getting free government money as a utility, and then turn around and pretend to be a luxury good (like a Galaxy S5 is).