I'm really looking forward to the point in the future where we look back and say, "Why did we ever think it was a good idea to allow the same company to provide the pipe, the content, and the backbone?"
In NYC I am paying $69/mo (approximately 61.50 EUR) for 50/50, and that's fiber. No TV.
I have seen bandwidth prices cited in places like Bulgaria, Estonia etc. that are much better.
No TV, just net + router included
The annoying part is that I can't get Just Internet.
Though I do agree that returning to the earlier regional railways, along with additional mainline and freight train operators, would have been a better way to organise.
So in the this case maybe AT&T having vertical integration is a good thing.
Personally I haven't seen any positives for consumers from Comcast buying NBC Universal so I don't see how this would benefit consumers either.
If you would like to find something that is comparable, I'll recommend to look for it related to the roads.
Try to imagine a situation were single private company owns all the roads (of one region), including all the highways and local roads and has also a bus company.
While I don't want to put forth a defeatist attitude, clearly a much more robust strategy than "write your senator/rep" must be devised. Ddos attacks at an unprecedented scale are occurring and probing all internet infrastructure. Not only is this a single point of fail, but is anti competitive, dangerous and bad for essentially everyone in the country. I think something like Calyx networks has a good small strategy, but literally short of raising a SPAC and buying a controlling interest, it seems hard to thwart.