 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
1 edit | reply to HMMM
Re: Message... Actually - TWC is raising rates... and possibly removing these channels. I've already lost FX here - TWC 'decided' (they don't even know about it really) that FX is ok on digital, but gone on analog, and replaced with 'Sleuth'. |
|
| said by en102:Actually - TWC is raising rates... and possibly removing these channels. It isn't TWC that would be removing these channels, it would be Viacom disallowing TWCable's satellite receivers from decoding these channels, as well as not allowing rebroadcast of the channels legally if TWC is still receiving them.
Do people finally see now that THIS is why a la carte isn't happening? It's because the content providers do not want to sell their channels to individual customers. They want to sell them to ALL customers, regardless if they watch them or not. |
|
|
|
en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | said by skuv :said by en102:Actually - TWC is raising rates... and possibly removing these channels. Do people finally see now that THIS is why a la carte isn't happening? It's because the content providers do not want to sell their channels to individual customers. They want to sell them to ALL customers, regardless if they watch them or not. Yup. A La Carte programming would cause individual channels to cost more than bundled. Advertisers would flock to popular channels, and whole blocks of channels would possibly go under. Eg. channels like ESPN would lose half their base. Most 'junk' channels would be gone immediately. I'd expect Viacom individual channels to be more expensive than the bundle if it were ever sold (eg. MTV $10 or Viacom bundle for $7
--
Canada = Hollywood North |
|
