idjk
@sprintlink.net | reply to Mchart
Re: Figures don't lie but you can lie with figures......
Anybody remember when cable 1st came out it was ad free- that was the reason for the monthly charge. |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to crischen
said by crischen  :Give me a la carte. I probably only watch 15 channels. It's funny. Some of the same people who yell "let the market decide" are the same people who don't want ala carte pricing.
I'd venture to say that a good portion of the channels out there would not survive if they weren't packaged wth other channels. Maybe they need to charge more for ads and pay their way onto a cable system. |
|
crischen
join:2000-11-07
Anderson, IN
| reply to moonpuppy
Give me a la carte. I probably only watch 15 channels.
Local NBC/ABC/CBS/FOX Affiliates (Don't watch CW and actually only watch Boston Legal on ABC.)
Sci-Fi
Food Network
Discovery
USA
Cartoon Network
TBS/TNT
A&E
History
Comedy Central
SpikeTV (For Star Trek)
My Cable Company (Insight) used to offer three packages for their digital boxes at $5 each, but recently (Nov.) combined them into one $12 pack and added about a dozen new channels nobody will watch. I called and cancelled it and told them I wasn't going to pay it til they added Boomerang.
I mean, yes, you can argue the per channel cost is lower (because of must carries that cost nothing getting averaged in), but 90% of the channels are garbage.
Someone mentioned ESPN costing $2.50... to be honest, if the channels I watch (that aren't free must carries) were that much, I'd still save money.
--
-Kinsey
Geeky chix0r |
|
Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL
clubs:
| reply to Mchart
said by Mchart :selling me new nose hair trimmers! Speaking of which. *cough* |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD | reply to JTRockville
500 channels and nothing to watch.
 |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to N3OGH
said by N3OGH :I'm paying those bums $100/mo And there's the problem. Until you stop paying those bums $100 a month they'll keep treating you like one.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange.
Save the Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus! |
|
donaldk
Premium
join:2000-10-19
Thunder Bay, ON
| reply to moonpuppy
oh I love watching american cable companies advertise cause its stupid. Wow get triple play Comcast for $33/month each (so $99/month at the end of it).
In a very faded almost overscanned bottom of the commerical it says only for the first year and it does not say full price. f*** that I keep my dish thank you very much (which is full of this nonsense cable co ads btw). I seriously wonder what the regular price is (which I bet is what the FCC uses... no I am not glorifying the FCC either, it has its own problems... you could always have the rogue style CRTC which needs a bitch slap in parlament... ). |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | reply to roamer1
Yep, and that's why the usual excuse of "higher program costs" is a shill. |
|
roamer1
sticking it out at you
join:2001-03-24
Atlanta, GA
clubs:
| reply to RadioDoc
said by RadioDoc :The NCTA is the cable industry equivalent of the RIAA. They represent both the MSOs and the program suppliers. That, of course, is largely because the MSOs have their hands in networks... (This is most obvious with Time Warner, but Comcast and most of the other big MSOs have their hands in programming, too.)
-SC
--
said to me: "it seems like all you ever buy is Abercrombie and cell phones"  |
|
ke4pym
join:2004-07-24
Charlotte, NC
 ·Verizon BroadbandA..
 ·Packet8
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to viperlmw
said by viperlmw :Now you're gonna need Sci-Fi channel for Enterprise re-runs starting tonight! Actually, you REALLY want HDNet so you can see said re-runs in High Def  |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to manfmmd
That all works in a macro sense that there are more channels available being subsidized by lots of eyeballs that never ever see them.
However...
You can't take that and turn it backwards to say that because there are 500 channels now the cost is lower. If you only watch 10 of them and only have watched 10 of them since 1996 and your bill has increased 193% in the last 10 years, your cost per channel watched has certainly not gone down.
Otherwise the NCTA could use 950 throw-away channels to claim that even with a 100% rate increase cable TV rates are now only 10% of that when there were only 50 channels.
Even Enron would have balked at that math.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange.
Save the Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus! |
|
roamer1
sticking it out at you
join:2001-03-24
Atlanta, GA
clubs:
1 edit | reply to TKJunkMail
said by TKJunkMail :Yes, I am paying for all those Spanish language channels; non-stop commercials channels; 50 music channels; 5 versions of PBS channels(all showing the same programs) The Spanish channels are probably must-carries, and the PBS stations certainly are...which means the cable company a) is not paying for them and b) has to devote capacity to them whether they want to or not. 
-SC
--
said to me: "it seems like all you ever buy is Abercrombie and cell phones" |
|
JTRockville
Data Ho
Premium,MVM
join:2002-01-28
Rockville, MD
clubs:
·LINGO
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·surpasshosting
 ·Verizon FIOS
| reply to moonpuppy
said by moonpuppy :nuff said. The cable companies are partially correct in that you get more channels but you don't have a choice whether or not to accept tham as part of your package. More channels? Yes.
More programming? No.
What used to be 1 channel is now 5. Big deal. The same shows are broadcast over and over so you have more chances to view them than before. But you don't get more programming.
Not really worth the enormou$ price increa$e. |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to compton
If you get 15 premium channels for $84 you're stealing the service...or know someone at Time Warner.
The only bang any cable customer is getting is the one from behind, as they are bent over.
The NCTA is the cable industry equivalent of the RIAA. They represent both the MSOs and the program suppliers. There is no incentive for them to ever even consider lowering the costs and (*gasp*) the rates charged. So, they just artificially jack up the "costs" while winking in the general direction of Congress.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange.
Save the Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus! |
|
manfmmd
Premium
join:2003-01-14
Earth
clubs:
| reply to SD6
This is an assumption on my part, but an educated assumption:
Let's imagine for a moment and use fake numbers:
The cost that the cable/sat provider pays to say, ABC for example, is based on blocks of subscribers, not per subscriber so say the cable company is paying:
$100 per month for 0-1000 subscribers
$200 per month for 1001-2000 subscribers
$300 per month for 2001-3000 subscribers
etc.
If you have the channels bundled up and there are 1000 people "paying" the monthly cost even though they don't watch the channel, it is being spread across the group of subscribers versus if only 500 people are "paying" the monthly cost. The cost to the cable/cat provider just doubled (and the cost is passed on to other subscribers that are not paying for those channels..you expect the cable/sat company to pay the difference ). The cost that the cable/sat provider is paying versus the cost that the subscriber base is paying is not linear.
I realize that the above numbers are not correct, but it gives a good idea of how broad based bundled cable/sat tv offerings benefit every subscriber. The same goes for obscure channels that you may watch that others do not. They help pay for you to be able to watch that channel.
Clear as mud?
--
huh? | AIM | Speaker Pelosi?!?...OH THE HUMANITY! |
|
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
·Verizon FIOS
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to viperlmw
said by viperlmw :said by N3OGH :Problem is, I don't watch %99 of those channels to start with. Let's see.. Discovery History G4 (for Star Trek TNG reruns) FX FNC CNN Headline The Weather Channel Local networks. Now you're gonna need Sci-Fi channel for Enterprise re-runs starting tonight! For real? I saw G4 was going to start running that "Trek 2.0" thing with the TNG re runs, and I have no interest in that.
Guess I'll have to change my DVR settings...
--
Never ask what sort of a computer a guy drives. If he's a Mac user, he'll tell you. If not, why embarrass him? -Tom Clancy |
|
viperlmw
Premium
join:2005-01-25
·Qwest.net
| reply to N3OGH
said by N3OGH :Problem is, I don't watch %99 of those channels to start with. Let's see.. Discovery History G4 (for Star Trek TNG reruns) FX FNC CNN Headline The Weather Channel Local networks. Now you're gonna need Sci-Fi channel for Enterprise re-runs starting tonight! |
|
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
·Verizon FIOS
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to TKJunkMail
Ahh, but..
"If PBS wouldn't do it, who would?"
No one you lunkheads, no one watches it!
The local PBS station here in Philly is "WHYY".
I say exactly: Why?????
--
Never ask what sort of a computer a guy drives. If he's a Mac user, he'll tell you. If not, why embarrass him? -Tom Clancy |
|
compton
join:2002-02-08
Brooklyn, NY
| reply to N3OGH
Actually prices may have gone down when you compare quantity and quality of channels. Back in the nineties, I used to pay $84 dollars for my Time Warner analog cable service. For that price, I had a 3 TV hook up, Basic Plus, 2 premium channels (HBO and Showtime) and 2 PPV channels. In all I had about 80 channels, but quite a few of those channels were community access channels, C-Span, shopping network and other public access networks. All in all, out of 80 channels about 60 of them had the type of programming that the average person and family watched. Now for that $84 (more or less) I can get 180 digital channels with about 15 premium channels, 10 PPV channels, video on demand plus many music radio channels. Today you are getting more bang for your buck; so, it is essentially a price decrease. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| reply to moonpuppy
said by moonpuppy :nuff said. The cable companies are partially correct in that you get more channels but you don't have a choice whether or not to accept tham as part of your package. Yes, I am paying for all those Spanish language channels; non-stop commercials channels; 50 music channels; 5 versions of PBS channels(all showing the same programs); music video channels; the Soap Opera channels; and 15 kids channels. None of which I ever watch. So maybe the price per channel is down, but so are the number of worthless channels that only 1% of the viewers ever look at.
--
--
My BLOG
My Web Page |
|
