Satellite is terrible and doesn't really count. I've never heard of someone using satellite unless they literally have no wired ISPs available. IMO it belongs in the same category as cellular internet.
According to this report, in 2013 only 28% of US households had three or more providers capable of giving 10Mbps service, and 24% only had one:
If you raise the bar to 25Mbps, then only 9% had three or more, and nearly half only had one choice. That's 2.5 years old, but I don't think it has changed all that much.
Maybe they offer even worse services in these buildings, but I bet that in areas where they have a monopoly simply because of no competition, I bet it's pretty bad too. It certainly was for me when I lived in such an area.
Those surveys include all of the US's massive rural areas. In urban areas there's more choice and much higher speeds. 80% of the population lives in urban areas.
I think its important to keep that in mind when reading surveys like these. Just because some guy who chooses to live in the middle of nowhere gets only 1.5mbps DSL doesnt mean I can't get 100+mbs in urban areas. I'm currently on a 100mbps in Chicago with AT&T and Comcast soon releasing their consumer-level gigabit fiber product. Other cities have the same or better, like Kansas City's Google fiber.
Its dishonest to say that high-rise renters in urban areas should think 10mbps is competitive. Its not remotely so.
This also cuts both ways. I know a building serviced just by RCN and every tenant gets 100mbps and a bunch of channels for a good price. Its a mixed bag, but usually leans on less competitive products.
If 80% of the US population lives in urban areas, and 50% of the US population only has one choice for 25Mbps service, then that means at least 37% of the urban population only has one choice. If 72% of the entire US population had at most two choices for 10Mbps, then that means at least 65% of urban dwellers do.
According to this report, in 2013 only 28% of US households had three or more providers capable of giving 10Mbps service, and 24% only had one:
http://esa.doc.gov/sites/default/files/competition-among-us-...
If you raise the bar to 25Mbps, then only 9% had three or more, and nearly half only had one choice. That's 2.5 years old, but I don't think it has changed all that much.
Maybe they offer even worse services in these buildings, but I bet that in areas where they have a monopoly simply because of no competition, I bet it's pretty bad too. It certainly was for me when I lived in such an area.