Botswana vs Morocco: Business telephone monthly subscription
Business telephone monthly subscription over time
- Botswana
- Morocco
How they compare
Botswana currently reports 20.47 current US$ against 17.8 current US$ in Morocco, a difference of 2.67 current US$.
That makes Botswana's figure about 1.2 times Morocco's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 20 shared years of data; in 1992 it was Botswana ahead.
Botswana ranks 4th and Morocco ranks 5th of 49 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Botswana averaged higher in 1 and Morocco in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Botswana | Morocco | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 4.97 current US$ | 5.73 current US$ | 0.7579 current US$ | Morocco |
| 2000s | 10.55 current US$ | 14.57 current US$ | 4.02 current US$ | Morocco |
| 2010s | 20.54 current US$ | 17.45 current US$ | 3.09 current US$ | Botswana |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher business telephone monthly subscription, Botswana or Morocco?
- Botswana, at 20.47 current US$ against 17.8 current US$ in Morocco as of 2011.
- What is the difference in business telephone monthly subscription between Botswana and Morocco?
- 2.67 current US$, with Botswana ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Botswana and Morocco?
- 20 years are reported by both, from 1992 to 2011.
- How do Botswana and Morocco rank globally for business telephone monthly subscription?
- Botswana ranks 4th and Morocco ranks 5th of 49 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- International Telecommunication Union, World Telecommunication Development Report and database, and World Bank estimates, published as Business telephone monthly subscription (current US$). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Please cite the International Telecommunication Union for third-party use of these data. Monthly subscription refers to the recurring fixed charge for subscribing to the PSTN in US$. The charge should cover the rental of the line but not the rental of the terminal (e.g., telephone set) where the terminal equipment market is liberalized. Separate charges should be stated where appropriate, for first and subsequent lines. If the rental charge includes any allowance for free or reduced rate call units, this should be indicated. If there are different charges for different exchange areas, the largest urban area should be used and specified in a note. This indicator is expressed in US dollars.