When assessing the degree to which internet access is unavailable to consumers, it always makes a difference whether we are considering services consumed by location, or by the person. Fixed services represent the former, mobile phone services the latter.
The difference is important. For any service consumed by location (homes or buildings), the number of people that are unserved is inaccurate. It is the number of unconnected locations that matters, since the service is consumed by “locations,” not “persons.”
In the United States, where Intelsat estimates that about one percent of the population does not have a single supplier of internet access, the number of “locations” not connected is far lower, perhaps in the area of four tenths of one percent, since the typical number of persons per home is 2.6.
The far bigger issue is locations that are able to buy service, but choose not to, estimated by Intelsat to represent 26 percent of people, or perhaps 10 percent of U.S. homes. Many assume the issue is supply, but a stronger argument actually is demand.
Some households simply choose not to buy the product, even when it is available, often preferring to use mobile broadband as a substitute.
Even in the 4G era, 15 percent to 20 percent of U.S. households have become mobile-only for internet access, while in Canada perhaps 20 percent of households already rely exclusively on mobile networks for internet access.
In some instances, as with younger, single-person households and lower-income households, reliance on mobile-only internet access is 10 percentage points to as much as 15 percentage points higher than that.
Some argue take rates sometimes are low because the service is deemed “too expensive.” That might sometimes be the case, despite the existence of subsidized services for low-income households, especially in remote areas where the only option is satellite access. But a good argument can be made that non-buyers are making rational choices.
They either do not value using the internet or they use the internet other ways (mobile, primarily).
Absolute lack of coverage (no terrestrial networks or service providers) is a major issue in parts of Africa and South Asia, however.