AVonGaussPremium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL | Unfortunately... Unfortunately, this is all just a continuation of politics and it seems on the surface to be ignoring one simple fact - the cost of acquiring content has also risen dramatically. No, I'm not saying I think cable or AT&T U-Verse is losing money on redistributing the content or even that their own profits margins haven't increased over the years, just that it's not as simple as saying you evil, bad, bad cable companies. You want an example of how the value of content is imbalanced - try $35-$40 for a Blu-ray disc of content that is twenty years old.
I doubt this inquiry has any deep support or teeth, but if it does and those involved are interested in solving or bettering the situation, there are several tracks it could take that might raise some eyebrows. One of them is content redistributors (Cable, Verizon, AT&T) do artificially help keep content prices inflated with the mega tiers. With more subscribers moving over to digital delivery mechanisms with digital conditional access, redistributors could break some of the mega tiers up in to smaller packages which would allow consumer dollar voting to more directly translate to the content producers thus helping the market to regulate itself naturally. In this model you would have a basic tier still, but instead of a mega expanded basic tier you would have 12-20 individual packages that could be optionally added just like HBO or Showtime. Not an a la carte channel model, but more of a compromise between the two. |
