59126125
Premium
join:2006-01-21
clubs:
| How hard would it be for cable to offer "a la carte"
While I'm not sure if forcing them to offer channels individually is a good idea, wouldn't it be relatively easy to do if they had something similar to Time Warner's project of switched digital video holding the channels at the edge router?
--
There is a reason the wires are twisted together, it's called a pair. It defeats the whole purpose of twisted pair cabling by using the solid orange and solid green to wire the jack. |
|
drslash
Goya Asma
Premium
join:2002-02-18
Marion, IA
| Let the crap channels die on the vine
I would like to see how many channels could survive on their own. I would also like to see the most expensive channels, like the many ESPN flavors, only get revenue from those who watch. ESPN is probably the biggest reason for annual or semi-annual cable rate hikes.
--
Save water...drink beer! |
|
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | And they may not even "die". Why not let the niche stuff move online....over the next ten years it seems like that's going to be the natural evolution anyway. |
|
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs:
 ·Charter Pipeline
 ·AT&T Southwest
1 edit | hurray, but concern about Martin's motivation...
i am in favor of a la carte. but i'm concerned about why Martin would flip flop on this issue. i know it's not about family values, etc, as it is being portrayed. it's about screwing the cable companies, possibly giving AT&T's craptastic offering a fighting chance? is it too early for theorizing? |
|
Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL
clubs:
| Family friendly?
and family-friendly networks (Disney, Nickelodeon, ABC Family) These stations aren't family friendly. Have you seen their advertisements? Sugar cereal, Bratz, McObese Kids, consume, consume, consume. No family should find these to be ok. I just go out and buy the DVDs of the shows my kids like so they don't have to be exposed to this filth. Plus, at the rate I would pay for cable and have built up a decent kids video collection that I can watch when I want, not when it's dictated to me.
--
"Padre, nobody said war was fun now bowl!" - Sherman T Potter
»www.cafepress.com/maxolasersquad
»maxolasersquad.com/
»maxolasersquad.com/network/ My DSL Network Guide
»myspace.com/mlsquad |
|
Cysco24
@dadeschools.net
| Of Course
"The cable industry continues to insist that allowing customers to pick individual channels "would raise prices for most consumers and harm diversity in programming." Of course the cable industry will also tell you that cable TV prices are dropping when they're constantly rising." How else are they gonna pay their CEOs 30+ million.
I can think of a handfull of channels i Like. Direct TV raised their prices by $10 a month. I remember the good old days where we used an antenna and watched tv for free. |
|
ColorBASIC
8-bit Fun
Premium
join:2006-12-29
Corona, CA
| reply to 59126125
Re: How hard would it be for cable to offer "a la carte"
"Big dish" suppliers do it and it's generally cheaper for most channels. I would personally favor it because I could give a crap less about channels like ESPN which jack my rates while others who love sports would gladly pay for them. I only watch maybe 5 or 6 channels meanwhile I'm paying for these expensive channels like ESPN because they're part of even the most basic package. |
|
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs:
·Charter Pipeline
·AT&T Southwest
| reply to Maxo
Re: Family friendly?
said by Maxo  :and family-friendly networks (Disney, Nickelodeon, ABC Family) These stations aren't family friendly. Have you seen their advertisements? Sugar cereal, Bratz, McObese Kids, consume, consume, consume. i thought what was coming next was advertisements for "girls gone wild" and sex phone lines. not sugar cereal.
this country runs because of our motto: consume consume consume. i don't like it, but i'm just one man. |
|
hoyleysox
join:2003-11-07
Long Beach, CA
·Cox HSI
·Time Warner Cable
| family values suck, but not a good idea
Parents already have the ability to block individual channels they do not want to receive. I would be curious to find out how many people actually choose to block channels, I hypothesize that it is a low number. If most Americans have problems setting the clock on their VCR, it would be too complicated for many people to bother to setup the filters.
Cable companies might as well fill the pipe. It costs more to filter channels than it does to send everyone all channels. Adding the functionality too add individual channel preferences to the system would impose another cost onto the cable industry. This would be passed to consumers and raise prices. I think the cable companies should fill their pipe with as many channels as possible. |
|
AtlGuy
join:2000-10-17
Marietta, GA | A la carte pricing compared to naked DSL pricing
I could easily see the cable companies doing the same things AT&T (I think) did with naked DSL pricing...charge so much that it isn't worth going a la carte. |
|
RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission
| reply to Cysco24
Re: Of Course
said by Cysco24 :
I remember the good old days where we used an antenna and watched tv for free.
We still use our outside antenna, it is a choice we made since the other services are about paying for what you do not want to support, like overpriced sports channels that have to keep jacking rates to pay for inflated sports salaries.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. |
|
rickonline
join:2005-11-15
North Bergen, NJ
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to hoyleysox
Re: family values suck, but not a good idea
Why not packages like this:
1. Any 5 basic cable entertainment channels for $4.99.
2. Any 10 basic cable entertainment channels for $8.99.
3. Any 3 basic cable sports channels for $6.99.
All would be on top of the broadcast channel package.
So if I wanted to watch just the broadcast channels plus SciFi, FX, TCM, Lifetime and Discovery then my cable bill would be about $20.00 for the programing.
--
Rick |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to morbo
Re: hurray, but concern about Martin's motivation...
said by morbo :i am in favor of a la carte. but i'm concerned about why Martin would flip flop on this issue. i know it's not about family values, etc, as it is being portrayed. it's about screwing the cable companies, possibly giving AT&T's craptastic offering a fighting chance? is it too early for theorizing? He is looking for a job. Martin knows he now has no chance of employment with a cable company so it might as well be either a telco OR an organization that can use his prior contacts in Congress and the FCC. |
|
wdoa
join:2001-10-16
Spencer, MA
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to drslash
Re: Let the crap channels die on the vine
yup, I would love to quit subsidizing the sports channel. I watch virtually no sports yet I know that much of my cable bill goes towards supporting the sports channel. I once had a cable exec in my local office tell me that 50% of his programming budget went to the sports channels. |
|
morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
clubs:
·Charter Pipeline
·AT&T Southwest
1 edit | reply to moonpuppy
Re: hurray, but concern about Martin's motivation...
then we need strict rules prohibiting this.
similar to the rules you hear on radio promotions: no current or former employee is eligible to "win" or be employed at any position in an organization he/she was just in charge of regulating. common sense rule. |
|
Prespd
join:2004-03-10
San Diego, CA
| what I want
Lower prices: Sure, but that isn't going to happen in any scenario.
A la carte: Sure that would be nice to not get channels you don't want. Might be good for Switched video too that TWC is trying out.
What I really want:
The damn cable companies to stop showing me the channels I don't get in the cable onscreen menu. If i wanted them, I would pay for them. In fact, I have. Just let me delete the references to channels I don't get. I don't need to see ten pages of archaic sports channels, obscure golf crap, QVC and all the other shopping channels etc..just to get to the HD channels when scrolling the menu. |
|
openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| OK, If Everyone Plays Along
I question the "need" to force corporate entities to deliver content a la carte on the premise of family values. Perhaps parents should fulfill their parental obligations. Or better yet, if access to such "filth" is such a hardship, maybe parents should step away from the TV, cancel their service, and partake in "family" activities.
Family values aside, if Martin wants to shove a la carte down content providers' throats, then it should be for all providers, to include telco, sat, cableco, IPTV providers, etc.
Side note, I'm a little miffed by the NCTA's comments that support continued bundling to create cost-efficiencies for minority and/or women-focused content. I think the fact that the content providers need to "force" delivery of this content says something about the desire for the content in the first place. |
|
flect
join:2006-05-31 | Wow
That is the best damn news story I ever read. Kudos to whoever wrote it. |
|
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| reply to morbo
Re: hurray, but concern about Martin's motivation...
Good idea. I would extend this rule to members of Congress and lobbyist organizations. As it stands now, Congressmen will often push a lobbyist's proposed bill through Congress because they know that that lobbyist will get them a high paying job (lobbying Congress most times) when they're out of Congress. |
|
Mactron
el camino Real
Premium
join:2001-12-16
CM94sv
| reply to hoyleysox
Re: family values suck, but not a good idea
said by hoyleysox : I would be curious to find out how many people actually choose to block channels, I hypothesize that it is a low number. I block Shopping, Religious, and Sports channels. But yet I still have to pay for them ! 
--
If only the Verizon CSRs worked this well.  |
|
