On the other hand, New York, I think, would be the exception rather than the rule. Am I right in thinking that faithful Catholics have, overall, no other choice than SSPX, if they live outside large cities. For instance, if you attend an SSPX chapel in any rural area in almost any part of the world, you have a small (cliquey?) group where a newcomer, or any particular dissenter, stands out like a sore thumb.
I think that the choices of faithful Catholics are to some extent dependent upon their circumstances, especially but not exclusively circumstances of age, health, geography, and domestic arrangements. But everything else being equal, Nadir, I would say that your suspicion is probably correct in the main. Nor would I be at all surprised at the presence of a cliquey spirit in certain places. Fortunate is the person who has never bitten his tongue to avoid saying, "Lord, I thank Thee that I am not like other men"!
The primary point of my comment, however, was to induce others to join me in raising an eyebrow at the claim that the person Maria Regina cited could "no longer attend any SSPX mass anywhere." That last word, which I reset in boldface to draw readers' attention to it, covers a lot of ground, after all.
Finally, at the risk of generating a good deal of ire, I shall say that I consider a decline into sedevacantism, whatever the circumstances, to be a catastrophe. Inasmuch as the sedevacantist outlook incorporates a claim to a virtually godlike degree of authoritative judgment about matters that no properly catechized layperson would ever publicly voice an opinion on, it may be said to be an almost exact equivalent on the theological plane of a gateway drug that, as like as not, will lead ere long to the heroin of home-aloneism.