| reply to Sammer
Re: Idiots... Ypu are correct and to add to that statement, The reason they have 50% bandwidth savings is because of those not need channels that we are forced to buy that no one watches. We have 50% to many channels that are junk being forced on us and we can't seem to do anything about it. |
|
| I agree that customers are forced to pay for crap they don't watch, but remember, it's not the cable companys that force that. It's the content providers. They are the ones who sell the content to the MSO in bundles. The MSO can definitely eliminate the garbage channels, but they had to pay for them and thus you will as well, so you might as well have them in the lineup. You can pay $10 for 10 channels (8 garbage) or $10 for 2 channels. |
|
|
|
 DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Then what these cable dumbasses to is put those two good channels on two different tiers so if you want them you have to pay $20 instead of $10. |
|
 swintecPremium,VIP
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME
kudos:3
 ·RapidVPS
 ·Sprint Mobile Br..
 ·VoicePulse
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| said by Dogfather: want them you have to pay $20 instead of $10. Umm...Wanting something, means you also agree with the price, or well, you wouldnt pay it. Judging by your posts here, you need to realize that cable service is not a necessary utility, that MUST be had.
--
Usenet Accounts |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
2 edits | It is irrelevant if it's a necessary utility. Companies are prohibited from engaging in certain anticompetitive behaviors and in this case the FCC stated the rules well in advance and TWC violated them. Microsoft Windows isn't a utility either, but that doesn't mean Microsoft was allowed to do anything in the marketplace they wanted to the detriment of competitors and consumers.
Take it or leave it are not competitive forces no matter how much the corporate kissasses and coaxial fanboys think they are. |
|
