Earlier quoted context omitted.
The vast majority of the cost of any kind of infrastructure is labor, which scales with local wages.[1] A New York subway ticket is about $2.75. That's about 11x more than the cost of a ticket on the Kiev Metro. And it's not like the New York subway makes a profit--fares cover only about half the system's operating costs.[2] In Baltimore, I paid about $50 for a 50mbps connection, or about 20x more than a subway ticke…
"The vast majority of the cost of any kind of infrastructure is labor, which scales with local wages." I'm not sure that's true. Let's say it costs VeriCast $500/year to maintain a single home's landline and broadband connections (including the stuff in the street), for which they charge the customer say $700 per year. Do they really have one employee per 200 connections (assuming $100k full-loaded cost per employee)…
Well for one you aren't adding in contractors. The people actually building the network aren't typically direct employees. The usual pattern is spend a ton of money to build out the network, earn it back through a number of years and then use the added cash flow to expand once more. Wireless networks are what the money is going to right now.
Regardless, you can look through all the various telecom quarterly reports to see where the money is going. They are for the most part profitable endeavours, but not especially lucrative (AT&T's latest quarter had a 8.67% net profit margin compared to 22.68% for Google).