dslreports logo
spacer
1
spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer

view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2012-12-28 10:27:28: A new pricing guide (pdf) making the rounds indicates that DirecTV is the latest company that plans to ring in the new year with a suite of service rate hikes. According to DirecTV, the average customer bill should go up around 4. ..

page: 1 · 2 · next


FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

Price increases very moderate

Looks to me like these price increases are very moderate.


Jon
Premium
join:2001-01-20
Lisle, IL

Why is this still news?

Every provider does this every year, sometimes twice a year. Is anyone still surprised by this?

NoHereNoMo

join:2012-12-06
No one ever said news had to be surprising, just current (as in "current events").

Beats having a blank page.
--
"...but ya doesn't hasta call me Johnson!"


jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1

Pop!

The heated battles are becoming more prominent between the TV and content providers with each new contract negotiation, and the latest news suggests that some providers are already scrambling to cut costs by dropping channels where they can.

Without any direct consumer control of the market with regards to pricing, and with no regulation in sight, this is going to get ugly and eventually the entire traditional market will collapse upon itself. This is simply not sustainable and the peak has been reached.

I expect the number of cord cutters to dramatically rise as this is the only viable option for an ever increasing sector of the population. That is, unless somebody wants to relinquish some power or take a pay cut.

tkdslr

join:2004-04-24
Pompano Beach, FL
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
reply to FFH5

Re: Price increases very moderate

said by FFH5:

Looks to me like these price increases are very moderate.

Far less than Dish network...

They're increasing prices on nearly all English packages by $5 to $15 a month.. DVR fee is also increasing another $1/mo..

»www.satelliteguys.us/attachment. ··· 55862050

elefante72

join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

1 recommendation

reply to jmn1207

Re: Pop!

The first provider to create a separate sports tier wins. These sports contracts are way out of control and now more than 50% of your cable bill is going to it.

The problem is that once they do that regular people will be paying $40 a month, and sports folks $160 which is a good thing because we should not be forced to pay.

What will come of that obviously is a two tier system where you have the all in package (like they already do for many sports), and PPV if say you want to watch one game.

This bundling has cause two very perverse issues in our society:

1. TV actors made a "living" in the 80's and commercials were 10 minutes. Now it is not unusual for a 2nd tier TV actor to make $1m per episode and commercials are hovering close to 20 min/hour. Cheap reality TV is like the 40's again with live entertainment TV...

2. Sports in general are now only for the rich. Spend a day at Yankee stadium and watch the hundreds disappear. This is being fueled by local tax breaks, local taxes forced on lodging,etc, and these TV contracts that are way out of control. Now broadcast TV is stuck also, so "free" OTA will disappear. Look at yesterday Comcast wanting to charge $25 for FREE OTA channels. Well you get QVC too

The result of this will eventually be a standoff, and the model will collapse by itself. No government interaction needed. These squabbles are just what the industry needs to piss consumers off.

Cable/Telco have already bet the farm on IPTV and internet. The margins are staggering. Sooner of later their fixed plant costs will allow them to drop cable because they will just be loosing to much money. TWC, Comcast, Cablevision big loosers here unless they figure out how to monetize their networks.

Note: This is probably 5-10 years out. The warning flares are up, this is by no means an emergency.


clevere1
Premium
join:2002-01-06
Vancouver, WA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·CenturyLink

Directv

Damn. Another (be it small) price increase ... I guess it's time to start looking for other options. Hell my family only watches a handful of channels anyway (locals + Kids programming is about it)
--
Where's th' DAFFY DUCK EXHIBIT??


jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1
reply to elefante72

Re: Pop!

No TV provider has any real option to place sports channels exclusively in their own package. The content providers will simply take their ball and go home if the TV providers do not capitulate to their greedy demands.

Dish Networks, in a recent dispute with AMC, saw thousands of defectors migrate to a competitor. A competitor, no doubt, offering a splendid 2-year contract supported by the existing customers through the regularly scheduled rate hikes on equipment and channel packaging.

Disney will not allow dozens of their channels to be placed on a specialized niche tier when negotiating with the TV providers, and this includes many of the ESPN family of sports channels. So far, the content providers simply need to wait for a while until the TV provider eventually caves. Then we all get to "enjoy" a sizable rate increase in some clever form or another in the near future.

This model can't collapse soon enough. You are right, sports is for the wealthiest elite nowadays, and this is quickly spreading to TV, and not just at the stadiums.

turnerbrewer

join:2011-11-22
reply to clevere1

Re: Directv

This is why I ditched DirectTV last year. I grew tired of the constant rate hikes. I use a TiVo DVR for over the air networks. I purchase Tv shows thru my Apple TV or Amazon. I watch NFL games locally over the air.
My monthly Tv bill went from $110 dollars a month down to $30 dollars a months....
It is only a matter of time before this business model implodes on itself.

sandman_1

join:2011-04-23
11111

Standard cable

Just have Time Warner Internet but I was getting standard cable with it. For the longest time, they didn't bother putting a trap on our line for whatever reason so we had what 60 channels or so. Then a month and half ago, they had some guy going through the neighborhood and I guess putting traps on lines with only Internet service customers. They didn't block most of the local OTA stations but they did for whatever reason block the NBC affiliate here which I found strange. If they were attempting to get us to sign up for a plan because we lost all of those channels, they were mistaken to say the least.

Anyway we were rocked about the change for about a day but I have a Winegard MS-2002, with an amp, that I reconnected and pull in around 36 channels OTA. We download the stuff we watched before and have our OTA channels to watch local sports and stuff if need be, only watch a few sports. We are not even missing the crap they had on standard cable and you don't realize how much crap there is until you "unhook". Most of it was terrible reality shows, I would say 90% now on most of the channels I use to watch: Discovery, Natgeo, History, ect..


fifty nine

join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ
kudos:2
reply to Jon

Re: Why is this still news?

said by Jon:

Every provider does this every year, sometimes twice a year. Is anyone still surprised by this?

It's less than my cable company which religiously raises rates by $5 every year or so. I don't know if they are raising this year.


espaeth
Digital Plumber
Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2

1 recommendation

HBO will now be $17.99/mo (up $2)

Congratulations, HBO. You have discovered the price point that will finally motivate me to call up and cancel my subscription to your network.


Jon
Premium
join:2001-01-20
Lisle, IL
$17.99 for one channel? I haven't subscribed to movie channels in probably 15 years but that seems ridiculous.


obeythelaw
Premium
join:2003-04-16
Bayonne, NJ
Reviews:
·Optimum Online
·Verizon FiOS
reply to espaeth
That is insane. FOr the last year I have been getting all of the premium movie channels at $6.99 each for 6 months. When they expire I call up and tell them it is too expensive to have all of them and they renew my 6 months "deal." I really don't want any of the "exclusive" shows on those channels. Was keeping them around for the one or two movies that I want to see during the month but it just isn't worth it anymore.

itguy05

join:2005-06-17
Carlisle, PA
reply to jmn1207

Re: Pop!

said by jmn1207:

Dish Networks, in a recent dispute with AMC, saw thousands of defectors migrate to a competitor. A competitor, no doubt, offering a splendid 2-year contract supported by the existing customers through the regularly scheduled rate hikes on equipment and channel packaging.

Disney will not allow dozens of their channels to be placed on a specialized niche tier when negotiating with the TV providers, and this includes many of the ESPN family of sports channels. So far, the content providers simply need to wait for a while until the TV provider eventually caves. Then we all get to "enjoy" a sizable rate increase in some clever form or another in the near future.

Had Dish been smart and looking long term they could have won the war. Yes they lost subscribers in the short term but had they stuck up to AMC they could have been rewarded with lower programming costs and therefore lower rates for their subscribers. And sent fear into the broadcasters. I'm sure there are plenty of households like ours that could care less about AMC as we watch 0 shows in it.

All we need is one smart company to say F-you to these broadcasters. And mean it. Similar to how we need to see 1 or 2 people beat down the RIAA/MPAA and you'll see things get better.

I for one would stay with FIOS if they ditched ESPN/Disney. No kids and we don't watch sports so it would make no difference for us. The only thing we may miss is the ABC/ABC Family but we have a local ABC affiliate so I think we'd be fine there.


Bill Neilson
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Arlington, VA

I actually loved DirecTV for the many years that I had it

but I really, really wish they stopped re-naming their f'ing packages.

Just stop please.....there is really no other reason to do so many changes other than to want the consumer to be completely confused....which probably means more bang for your buck.

Kamus

join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX
reply to FFH5

Re: Price increases very moderate

said by FFH5:

Looks to me like these price increases are very moderate.

moderate? that's half a Netflix subscription right there, for no added content.

The only thing i regret is not leaving them earlier than i did.


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

1 recommendation

reply to turnerbrewer

Re: Directv

No, because 1) They'll blame it all on piracy, and push for more draconian laws, and 2) They'll come in with massive metering and overbilling to shut down competition like Netflix, Amazon, etc

Even if the business model should implode, it will be artificially reinforced with laws and regulations for FORCE people to pay or just become a recluse, period.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
reply to itguy05

Re: Pop!

Listen everyone says the pay TV companies should stand up to the content providers, but when they do like Dish did with AMC looks what happens. these same people that made the demand left Dish for another company that gave into the content providers that paid the higher rates. So what does that tells Dish and any other pay TV provider? That customers don't have your back so why bother trying. if you're going to demand that your pay T provider stand up to the content providers then don't bail on them when you lose channels when they do.

So at the end of the day the reason why Dish's attempt to stand up to the content providers failed is because of the CUSTOMER and so in the end its the CUSTOMERS fault for higher prices.


amenite
The Soylent - It's People
Premium
join:2002-11-21
Ridgewood, NJ
reply to obeythelaw

Re: HBO will now be $17.99/mo (up $2)

Seems like I pick up more full length uncut movies on HDNet than I ever do on HBO, and HDNet is no extra fee with my Fios plan. Also seems like it was around this time last year that I got fed up enough with DirecTV that I bailed. Happy and saving $$ ever since, and this sure is no reason to go back!
--
Time is an abstract concept invented by carbon based life forms to monitor their constant decay.-Thunderclese


antdude
A Matrix Ant
Premium,VIP
join:2001-03-25
United State
kudos:5

Like everything else!


itguy05

join:2005-06-17
Carlisle, PA
reply to 88615298

Re: Pop!

said by 88615298:

Listen everyone says the pay TV companies should stand up to the content providers, but when they do like Dish did with AMC looks what happens. these same people that made the demand left Dish for another company that gave into the content providers that paid the higher rates. So what does that tells Dish and any other pay TV provider? That customers don't have your back so why bother trying. if you're going to demand that your pay T provider stand up to the content providers then don't bail on them when you lose channels when they do.

So at the end of the day the reason why Dish's attempt to stand up to the content providers failed is because of the CUSTOMER and so in the end its the CUSTOMERS fault for higher prices.

If I remember, nobody knows what Dish and AMC settled for. As with most of the settlements, the terms are never made public.

Yes, Dish lost customers, but I wonder how long that would have continued after the first couple of weeks. Given ratings of AMC, I'd think not many care about them.

If any of these companies were smart, they would do a Comcast and buy a network. That way they could say "yes we got rid of AMC, but here is XYZ to replace it".

I know I could care less if probably 1/2 of the channels were not there, including AMC, ESPN, and MTV...

TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
reply to obeythelaw

Re: HBO will now be $17.99/mo (up $2)

chances are that is for at least 3 HBOs. You don't normally get 1 anymore with Digital cable.


cousintim

join:2004-10-10
Dallas, TX
reply to amenite
In its early years, HBO was $7.95.


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
reply to itguy05

Re: Pop!

said by itguy05:

said by 88615298:

Listen everyone says the pay TV companies should stand up to the content providers, but when they do like Dish did with AMC looks what happens. these same people that made the demand left Dish for another company that gave into the content providers that paid the higher rates. So what does that tells Dish and any other pay TV provider? That customers don't have your back so why bother trying. if you're going to demand that your pay T provider stand up to the content providers then don't bail on them when you lose channels when they do.

So at the end of the day the reason why Dish's attempt to stand up to the content providers failed is because of the CUSTOMER and so in the end its the CUSTOMERS fault for higher prices.

If I remember, nobody knows what Dish and AMC settled for. As with most of the settlements, the terms are never made public.

Yes, Dish lost customers, but I wonder how long that would have continued after the first couple of weeks. Given ratings of AMC, I'd think not many care about them.

Couple of weeks? This went on for a few months


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
reply to cousintim

Re: HBO will now be $17.99/mo (up $2)

said by cousintim:

In its early years, HBO was $7.95.

And if you take inflation into account that would be over $20 a month. No HD, no online access and just one channel.


cork1958
Cork
Premium
join:2000-02-26

1 recommendation

reply to antdude

Re: Like everything else!

Yep,
First of the year and EVERYONE will be doing their annual a** reaming!!

Can't wait to see how much Charter decides to rape their customers now with that new, totally ignorant and clueless CEO, they have!!
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonk ··· amonkey/


spewak
R.I.P Dadkins
Premium
join:2001-08-07
Elk Grove, CA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·SureWest Internet
reply to KrK

Re: Directv

said by KrK:

No, because 1) They'll blame it all on piracy, and push for more draconian laws, and 2) They'll come in with massive metering and overbilling to shut down competition like Netflix, Amazon, etc

Even if the business model should implode, it will be artificially reinforced with laws and regulations for FORCE people to pay or just become a recluse, period.

Knocked it out of the park there my friend!
If they don't get us coming financially, they will most certainly get us going legally and unethically!
--
Romney becomes "the" Epic Failure!

itguy05

join:2005-06-17
Carlisle, PA
reply to 88615298

Re: Pop!

said by 88615298:

Couple of weeks? This went on for a few months

Wow - didn't think it was that long - but a little Googling said it was July - Oct. I still wonder what the defections due to AMC were after the initial wave. In the article I read, it said Dish was about 13% of AMC's viewer base. That is a decent chunk to miss.

It would be interesting to see who gave first and how close the numbers were. Sadly we will never know.

I did find this that it hurt AMC's financials:
»online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ··· 934.html

So maybe playing hardball is in the content deliverer's favor. After all what good is content if your distribution is limited? Not everyone has their TV's hooked up to the Internet and most will not watch shows on their laptops or even tablets.

itguy05

join:2005-06-17
Carlisle, PA
reply to espaeth

Re: HBO will now be $17.99/mo (up $2)

said by espaeth:

Congratulations, HBO. You have discovered the price point that will finally motivate me to call up and cancel my subscription to your network.

We gave it up after the Sopranos and then when Big Love was done. I'd add it when the shows started and remove it when they were done. Worked well and we would usually be on some promo so it wasn't full price. There is nothing on HBO worth $18/mo.