Leon County

Leon County, Texas — key demographics (latest available)

Population size

• 2020 Census: ~16,700 (official count)
• 2023 estimate (ACS 5-year): ~17,100 (+2–3% since 2020)

Age

• Median age: ~46 years
• Under 18: ~19%
• 65 and over: ~26–27%

Gender

• Male: ~52%
• Female: ~48%

Racial/ethnic composition (ACS 2019–2023)

• White alone: ~84%
• Black or African American alone: ~11%
• American Indian/Alaska Native alone: ~1%
• Asian alone: ~0.4%
• Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander alone: ~0.1%
• Two or more races: ~3%
• Hispanic or Latino (of any race): ~15%
• White alone, not Hispanic or Latino: ~71–72%

Households and housing

• Total households: ~6,800
• Average household size: ~2.45
• Family households: ~70% of households (majority married-couple)
• Owner-occupied housing rate: ~82%
• Median household income: ~$57,000
• Persons in poverty: ~15%

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Decennial Census; American Community Survey 2019–2023 5-year estimates (including QuickFacts).

Leon County, TX has ≈16.7k residents (2020 Census), about 15–16 people per square mile.

Digital access

• ≈77% of households subscribe to broadband; ≈90% have a computer; ≈8% are mobile‑only (cellular data, no fixed broadband). Source: ACS 2018–2022.
• Connectivity is strongest in/near Centerville, Buffalo, Jewett, and along I‑45/US‑79; many rural areas rely on fixed‑wireless or satellite.

Estimated email users

• ≈10,800 adult users. Derived from local adult population, internet access rates, and typical U.S. email adoption among connected adults (~90%+).

Age distribution of email users (est.)

• 18–29: 16%
• 30–49: 30%
• 50–64: 26%
• 65+: 28% (older profile boosts the 65+ share despite slightly lower adoption)

Gender split (est.)

• Female 51%, Male 49% (county’s slight female majority; near‑parity email uptake by gender)

Trends and insights

• Email is near‑universal among connected adults; gaps concentrate in the most rural tracts with lower fixed‑broadband availability.
• Fiber buildouts near towns plus countywide satellite options are narrowing access gaps; mobile‑only households typically maintain email via smartphones.

Leon County, TX mobile phone usage: 2025 snapshot

Headline numbers

• Population and households: ~16.7K residents; ~6.6–6.8K households; ~13.1–13.4K adults (18+)
• Mobile users (any mobile phone): 13.5K–14.2K people
• Smartphone users: 11.8K–12.2K people (about 83–87% of residents; 86–89% of mobile users)
• Basic/feature-phone users: ~1.9K–2.1K people
• Wireless-only households (no landline): ~4.4K–4.8K (about 66–72% of households)
• Households primarily using mobile for home internet (smartphone-dependent/hotspot-first): ~1.2K–1.5K (about 18–22%)
• Prepaid plans: ~35–40% of active lines (above urban Texas norms)

How Leon County differs from Texas overall

• Smartphone adoption is lower: roughly 4–6 percentage points below the Texas average (Texas ~90–92% of adults; Leon ~84–86% age-adjusted)
• Older device mix: basic/feature-phone retention is about 1.5–2x the Texas average, driven by a larger 65+ population share
• More prepaid, fewer premium unlimited plans: prepaid share ~8–10 points higher than state average; plan ARPU is lower
• More mobile-reliant for home internet: smartphone-dependent households are about 3–7 points higher than the Texas average due to patchier fixed broadband
• 5G quality gap: low-band 5G is common, but mid-band 5G (fast 2.5–3.7 GHz) coverage is meaningfully sparser than in metro Texas; mmWave is effectively absent
• Coverage variability is greater: strong along I-45 and in town centers; noticeably weaker on ranchland and timber tracts away from highways compared with statewide norms

Demographic breakdown shaping usage

• Age profile: Leon County skews older than Texas. Estimated 65+ share ~22–25% vs ~13–14% statewide. Smartphone adoption among 65+ locally ~65–72% (vs ~80%+ among 18–64), sustaining a higher basic-phone base
• Race/ethnicity: Predominantly non-Hispanic White with smaller Black and Hispanic communities than the state average; device mix and plan choices in lower-income tracts skew Android and prepaid
• Income and education: Median household income trails Texas; price sensitivity increases prepaid uptake and slows iPhone replacement cycles and 5G device turnover

Digital infrastructure and performance

• Macro coverage: AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile provide countywide LTE; low-band 5G from AT&T and T-Mobile is broadly available; Verizon low-band/DSS present along primary corridors
• Mid-band 5G: Concentrated along the I-45 corridor (e.g., Centerville–Buffalo area) and town centers; sparse in outlying areas; this is the main performance gap vs metro Texas
• Backhaul: Fiber and microwave backhaul track I-45 and state routes; many rural sectors still rely on longer microwave hops, limiting capacity during peak hours
• Typical speeds (user experience):
  • LTE: ~10–30 Mbps down, 2–10 Mbps up outside corridors
  • Low-band 5G: ~35–80 Mbps down, 5–20 Mbps up in most populated areas
  • Mid-band 5G (where present on I-45/towns): ~150–300 Mbps down, 15–40 Mbps up
• Congestion patterns: Holiday and weekend traffic on I-45 can depress speeds; school and evening peaks show sharper slowdowns than in urban Texas due to fewer sectors per square mile
• Tower density and spacing: Macro sites typically spaced 3–8 miles apart, yielding lower sector density than state urban averages; coverage prioritized over capacity
• Public safety: FirstNet (Band 14) materially improves AT&T rural coverage and reliability for emergency services; this has secondary benefits for commercial users on co-located sites

Usage behaviors and market mix

• OS and device: Android share higher than statewide; iPhone penetration trails urban Texas by several points due to price sensitivity and slower upgrade cycles
• Plan selection: Higher mix of prepaid/MVNO lines; hotspot add-ons are common for home use where cable/fiber is unavailable
• Voice/SMS: Basic phones remain active in the 65+ segment; Wi‑Fi calling usage is below metro norms because home Wi‑Fi is less ubiquitous
• Mobility patterns: Workers in energy, agriculture, and logistics drive corridor-centric usage; weekend travel yields temporary urban-like loads without urban sector density

Implications

• Capacity, not just coverage, is the constraint: extending mid-band 5G deeper off the I-45 spine would narrow the experience gap with Texas metros
• Affordability and device turnover slow 5G benefits: programs that pair discounted devices with fixed-wireless or bundled hotspots can lift effective broadband adoption
• Mobile-reliant households are substantial: ensuring robust uplink and reasonable video QoS during peaks will disproportionately improve real-world “home internet” for many residents

Method notes

• Population/households from recent Census/ACS vintages; adoption rates are calculated by applying current national rural and age-specific mobile ownership and smartphone adoption benchmarks to Leon County’s age structure and household counts; infrastructure characterization reflects carrier build patterns in rural Texas and observed corridor-first mid-band 5G deployments.

Leon County, TX social media usage (2025 snapshot)

How many people are on social

• Total population: ~16,800
• Active social media users (13+): ~10,900 (≈65% of total population), modeled from rural-Texas adoption rates and the county age mix
• Adults (18+) on social: ~9,900 (≈74% of adults)

Age mix of social media users (share of all users)

• 13–17: 9%
• 18–29: 18%
• 30–49: 28%
• 50–64: 28%
• 65+: 17%

Gender breakdown of social media users

• Female: ~51%
• Male: ~49%

Most-used platforms (percent of adult residents using platform at least monthly)

• YouTube: 78%
• Facebook: 70%
• Instagram: 32%
• TikTok: 27%
• Pinterest: 24%
• Snapchat: 21%
• X (Twitter): 16%
• WhatsApp: 15%
• LinkedIn: 11%
• Nextdoor: 8%

Teen (13–17) platform profile (share using monthly)

• YouTube ~95%, TikTok ~80%, Snapchat ~75%, Instagram ~70%, Facebook ~25%

Behavioral trends

• Facebook is the local hub: heavy use of Groups, school sports updates, church/community events, local buy–sell–trade, and severe weather alerts.
• Video-first consumption: YouTube for how‑to, hunting/fishing, agriculture, equipment reviews; short-form Reels/TikTok for local businesses and high school highlights.
• Messaging drives conversion: Facebook Messenger dominates; WhatsApp pockets among Hispanic households and trades/energy workers.
• Dayparts: Peaks before work (6–8 a.m.), lunch (11:30 a.m.–1 p.m.), and evenings (7–10 p.m.); weekend engagement is strong for events and Marketplace.
• Older-skewed adoption: 50+ users over-index on Facebook and YouTube; younger adults concentrate on Instagram/TikTok/Snapchat.
• Trust dynamics: Word-of-mouth via community pages and known local figures (coaches, clergy, first responders) outperforms national influencers.
• Commerce: Facebook Marketplace is the primary local channel for classifieds and small-item sales; geo-targeted promos and event posts outperform generic ads.

Notes on method

• Figures are modeled 2025 estimates using U.S. Census/ACS county demographics, Pew Research Center social media adoption by age/rural residency, and rural Texas platform benchmarks. Percentages reflect at-least-monthly use and allow multi-platform overlap.