how-to block ads
|
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. | |
phattieg
join:2001-04-29
Winter Park, FL
 ·Verizon Wireless B..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| said by ColorBASIC  :"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. Well, I hope you get your way, so you can pay 3 times more for the channels you watch. You don't get it. It's like buying in bulk. You buy 1 pound for $2, or 10 pounds for $6. You might not need 10 pounds, but even if you only needed 4 pounds, it would be cheaper to buy 10 pounds. Same with cable channels. When the FCC decides to control cable providers, like they have controlled censorship, then we will have a bunch of idiots willing to pay the same monthly price, just to watch what they like. Me, personally, I love having "the channels people don't watch", because if I see a commercial for a program I am interested in, or if none of the other channels I DO like are playing something interesting, I can usually find something that will pass time on one of the channels I watch the least. I usually watch National Geographic, or most of the Discovery channel related stations, but I occasionally watch G4 for some shows, or Spike TV. Did I mention I am not a sports fan, don't like Football, Basketball, Baseball, or any other sport, really, but yet I will watch extreme fighting challenges, which come on a variety of stations. It would be a shame that I have to pay extra money to get a decent variety, just because a few pretentious assholes want it their way. I think you should just think about how much money you're really going to cost US, the consumer, in the end. And maybe with the rate increases that it will generate, we might be able to actually hear cuss words on TV, instead of them pissing over our rights for "free speach", but I won't hold my breath, because the religious groups don't know how to "turn off the device" when it's spewing things you don't want to hear or watch. If the FCC does this, I will have to consider moving out of this country. I don't hate Americans, I just hate American politicians. We have the biggest joke of a government right now, if you sit back and look at the big picture.
--
SIPPhone/Gizmo # 17476200648 / PIMPNET Chatline / Ran by Asterisk & Slackware 10.1. | |
Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| said by phattieg : I can usually find something that will pass time on one of the channels I watch the least. Heh, heaven forbid you switch off and read a book.
said by phattieg :It would be a shame that I have to pay extra money to get a decent variety, just because a few pretentious assholes want it their way. Hey that's just how we feel, except we all think it will be cheaper to get the channels we want a la carte.
said by phattieg :I think you should just think about how much money you're really going to cost US, the consumer, in the end. You mean using negative numbers?
Your argument seems to be that it will be more expensive for you, because you like having a lot of channels, so the rest of us should just suck it up, and keeping paying more so you can be happy. That's quite compelling..
I could probably live with just the networks, and NESN. I would just use OTA, but the price bump for my internet would make cost savings nil especially because I'm on the continuous $99/3 services package. | |
clickie
join:2005-05-22
Monroe, MI
| reply to phattieg
It's not like buying in bulk because the free market forces have been removed. Your cable rates subsidize the broadcast medium of networks that otherwise would not be viable. To use your analogy, you go to the store to buy coffee and your option is $75 for coffee, no matter how much you want, but you have to take ALL the flavors. What you get is coffee in regular, regular blend, French vanilla (which you hate) and several other flavors like cola flavored coffee, lime-water flavored coffee and cat feces flavored coffee, which nobody wants. Your $75 purchase for a few flavors of coffee you enjoy nets you products you simply throw away and subsidizes people who are making coffee in favors no one wants. Ask yourself, why do the people making cat feces flavored coffee deserve one penny of the money? Is it just so the three people who actually enjoy that flavor can get it? Where's the free market and why are we as consumers finding ourselves gradually removed from the benefits of the free market while corporations take full advantage of it?
THAT is the state of pricing in cable TV and the consumer's ability to vote with their dollars has been removed. While it's all fine and well to get these niche channels as part of the deal, but at what point are there too many? The real limiting factor, a high barrier to entry in the form of cash to broadcast, has been removed so there is no real limit to the number of channels that can be added in this manner nor is there a limit to where your cable rates will go as it subsidizes these channels.
This method of pricing only reduces any incentive to produce a good product.
Ala carte pricing is, fortunately, a foregone conclusion as more and more networks will find other ways in which to distribute their product. Arguments about network neutrality are moot, if the consumer wants a network broadcasting on the internet, the consumer will find a way to watch it. | |
ColorBASIC
8-bit Fun
Premium
join:2006-12-29
Corona, CA
4 edits | reply to phattieg
You are the one who doesn't get it. If I only need an ounce of sugar, how am I saving money buying 300LBS of it?  That's the point, per your example I would only want the 2 LBS but in order to get 1/2 lb of this and a 1/2 lb of that I have to buy 20LBS...10LBS in 1 tier and 10LBS in another. For people who watch tons of stuff they can still buy tiers and for people like me, I'd like to buy the 6 el cheapo channels I actually watch.
I could give a crap less about channels like ESPN which jack my rates while others who love sports would gladly pay for them. Meanwhile if I want a $1 channel like Sci-Fi I'm forced to pay for an $8 channel like ESPN.
Looking at big dish pricing (which I can't get 'cause of my Nazi-HOA) my bill would be less than $15/mo for the EXACT same programming I WANT and am paying $60+ for because providers like E* jockey channels as to spread popular channels over all the tiers so you have to buy all the tiers and worthless channels if you want those few channels. | |
n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
 ·Optimum Online
| reply to ColorBASIC
[BQUOTE=ColorBASICI could give a crap less about channels like ESPN which jack my rates while others who love sports would gladly pay for them.[/BQUOTE
Same here. Other than the network and local channels I watch the news feeds CNN, CNN Headline, FNC, MSNBC, SciFi, Comedy, History, A&E, TVLand, Spike and FX. That's all I want/need.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears. | |
ColorBASIC
8-bit Fun
Premium
join:2006-12-29
Corona, CA
1 edit | And if you look at big dish pricing for those few channels, they're about $1/mo each, some even cheaper. | |
asdfdfdfdf
@Level3.net | reply to ColorBASIC
I don't think you can use the a la carte prices you find now as an indicator of what prices would be like if all the major players moved to a la carte. The small amount of a la carte happening right now isn't significant enough to have an impact. | |
raybrett
join:2001-02-20
Saint Louis, MO | reply to ColorBASIC
If ala carte were mandated, I would likely lose my analog channels and have to pay significantly more for digital service and receivers. I doubt I would save any money. More likely it would double my costs. | |
ColorBASIC
8-bit Fun
Premium
join:2006-12-29
Corona, CA
| There is nothing to say you wouldn't still have bundled tiers in addition to a la carte. That is what we see with the big dish market. You have both a la carte pricing and discounts when you buy more channels and/or prepay a few months in advance.
A la carte prices would only drop further if expanded as they would have to compete even harder for subscribers. Prices would drop and programming improve if these program providers had to compete for the dollar instead of get a free ride in basic forced on us tiers. | |
clickie
join:2005-05-22
Monroe, MI | reply to ColorBASIC
My analogy may not be perfect, but it sure as heck is better than yours. | |
devnuller
join:2006-06-10
Hollis, NH
| reply to Ahrenl
If you want a la cart, get DirecTV... oh wait they don't do it... get FiOS TV... hmm... no that won't work either..
Perhaps it would be better of if the Government took over TV distribution from Cable, Sat, and Telco's since the obviously know how to run a profitable company... hmm... this argument isn't going well... | |
ColorBASIC
8-bit Fun
Premium
join:2006-12-29
Corona, CA | reply to clickie
I guess you missed the whole "reply to Phattieg" thing. | |
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to raybrett
said by raybrett :If ala carte were mandated, I would likely lose my analog channels and have to pay significantly more for digital service and receivers. I doubt I would save any money. More likely it would double my costs. analog channels are going to be going by the wayside anyways. | |
raybrett
join:2001-02-20
Saint Louis, MO | Unfortunately, you are right, but I will hang on as long as I can. After that, I may have to settle for DVDs. I am not sure I will go to digital receivers. | |
phattieg
join:2001-04-29
Winter Park, FL
·Verizon Wireless B..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
1 edit | reply to Ahrenl
said by Ahrenl Heh, heaven forbid you switch off and read a book. :
Yeah, and heaven forbid you drop cable and read your own damn books if you "don't want to pay for channels YOU don't watch". I don't feel I should have to pay more for the same stations I have enjoyed as a bundle, nor do I want to have to call my cable company everytime I see something coming on a channel I USED to have.
My whole reasoning on that comes from other things in life, and with cable, that cost more "a la carte". For example, calling features on your phone. Buy a package (like Complete Choice) and get 7 features, but buy those features by themselves, and you pay twice as much. Get a cell plan with more minutes, and more text messaging, and you don't have to pay "overages" which is another way of saying "we're going to screw you because you didn't get a package". The media giants are the same way. So what if you don't watch ESPN, but Disney owns them, and a few other channels, and gives the cable company a break when they include them in the basic lineup, and they pass it to us, the customer.
said by Ahrenl Hey that's just how we feel, except we all think it will be cheaper to get the channels we want a la carte. :
Well, nobody denied that you FELT that way. But my comment actually got a thumbs up, and yours didn't, so I think it's the other way around, and people agree with what I'm saying, or at least see the logic involved. I actually addressed it, and labeled it "stupid thinking". I think my analogy of 1 pound for $2 vs. 10 pounds for $6, when you only needed 4 pounds to begin with, still is cheaper to buy 10 pounds, kinda nailed it. You just don't get the end result, do you? These channel providers like Viacom, Disney, AOL/Time Warner, etc, they don't need to price it "fairly" to the cable companies "customers". Case in point. Take away packages, and these @$$hole companies are going to make up for the channels nobody watches by charging more for the channels people DO watch. Thats how the channel providers work. They will recover the loss by charging more for the channels people actually watch. So while you're preaching to me that you "THINK" it will be cheaper, I am preaching back to you that I have worked for a cable company for 5 years, and this will NOT make things cheaper at all, PROMISED. It's going to force everything to digital, because their not going to make a channel trap for analog customers who "want to a la carte" service, there's just too many possible combinations. That means the cable box you rent from the cable company will be needed, which means more monthly income to the cable company for equipment you don't want. Does that make any sense to you???
said by Ahrenl You mean using negative numbers?
Your argument seems to be that it will be more expensive for you, because you like having a lot of channels, so the rest of us should just suck it up, and keeping paying more so you can be happy. That's quite compelling.. No, my arguement will be this. Right now, I pay $50 a month for basic cable. And I get 70 channels, for about $0.72 each channel. If you go a la carte, then those same 70 channels will cost $80, because the carriers will raise rates on the "good" channels, or the "popular" ones. All because you think it's cheaper. It's stupidity. Take your own advice, read a damn book at the library for free, or actually USE the product you're paying for.
said by Ahrenl I could probably live with just the networks, and NESN. I would just use OTA, but the price bump for my internet would make cost savings nil especially because I'm on the continuous $99/3 services package. :
Good, hook up the rabbit ears, and get the hell on with life if it don't mean much to you. Obviously you have better things to do, besides posting on here. Me, I enjoy getting off a long day of work, cracking open a beer, and watching whatever the hell happens to be on. I have a DVR, and my roommate uses it more than I do, because I have an opportunistic approach to how I watch TV. For you to even imply that I need to read a book is redundant to your own arguement, as you can read your own book, and be happy, while I watch the movie, and save 2-4 days of flippin pages, and catch the story in 2 hours. I'm glad you're on the triple play, but don't think for one second that even for the occasional user, a la carte channels will be "cheaper".
But, hard headed people don't learn. I think it will be unfortunate if this change is forced upon TV providers. You think it's hard enough getting a promo offer from your cable provider now, wait for this change. The TV providers (sat, fiber, and cable) won't be able to "package" anything, because each channel will not cost the same to add.
Flame away, though. It still makes no sense to a la carte things. If you REALLY want my opinion, the commercials all these channels play should pay for their own bills, and we should be watching TV for free, like the local channels, which I'm sure we can BOTH agree on.
--
SIPPhone/Gizmo # 17476200648 / PIMPNET Chatline / Ran by Asterisk & Slackware 10.1. | |
rtcy
FACTS only please
Premium
join:1999-10-16
Beverly Hills, CA
 ·Verizon west (ex G..
1 edit | reply to phattieg
said by phattieg :said by ColorBASIC :"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. Well, I hope you get your way, so you can pay 3 times more for the channels you watch. You don't get it. It's like buying in bulk. well you DON'T get it but here is a clue for you, as to how inexpensive Ala Carte is, it means people liky YOU can buy the packaged version and people like me can buy what we want, it's called a CHOICE. think before you go calling the rest of us aholes.
»www.callnps.com/alacarte.htm
this is what I pay with my large dish, and I also have Dishnetwork for the rest of the house that costs 98.00 a month.
come back with a good answer | |
rtcy
FACTS only please
Premium
join:1999-10-16
Beverly Hills, CA
·Verizon west (ex G..
| reply to raybrett
said by raybrett :If ala carte were mandated, I would likely lose my analog channels and have to pay significantly more for digital service and receivers. I doubt I would save any money. More likely it would double my costs. Fist off sooner than later you are going to loose that ANALOG box, it's called HD / Digital and it's mandated, so kiss those free channels away.
and NO it Ala Carte won't cost you twice it will cost you what ever you are *willing* to pay for. please notice the keyword is WILLING because you decide what you want to buy! | |
rtcy
FACTS only please
Premium
join:1999-10-16
Beverly Hills, CA
·Verizon west (ex G..
| reply to devnuller
said by devnuller :If you want a la cart, get DirecTV... oh wait they don't do it... get FiOS TV... hmm... no that won't work either.. Perhaps it would be better of if the Government took over TV distribution from Cable, Sat, and Telco's since the obviously know how to run a profitable company... hmm... this argument isn't going well... they do not do it, because there are companies like Viacomm that shove the whole enchilada down the troats of cable dish operators and because Dishnetworks and Directtv are both barely making money, so in order to keep charging those exorbitant prices they like it just fine the way it is, oh yes and Cable likes it that way too so they can continue those excesive profits | |
BF69
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN
| reply to raybrett
said by raybrett :Unfortunately, you are right, but I will hang on as long as I can. After that, I may have to settle for DVDs. I am not sure I will go to digital receivers. Well all TV manufacture after March 1st 2007 have to have digital tuners built in. So if you buy a new TV( make sure the store isn't selling you on made before March 1 if under 27 inches ) and you can get off the air channels then maybe that's your best bet after Feb 2009 when all analog stations are cut off. Most local stations now broadcast in both analog and digital. A TV with a built in tuner and an antenna should get you at least some local stations. | |
|
