Cable Carriers Fined For Stalling FCC Price Investigation > A few observations

reply to fAcEtIOUs

Re: A few observations

reply to BosstonesOwn
I believe cable companies should provide an unencrypted basic tier of HD that any digital set can receive.

Mandatory set top boxes are a profit center for cable companies and hurt those who have the least IMO.

The FCC shouldn't lightly permit unencrypted cable from disappearing, even if eventually all signals are digital.
--
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use."

reply to fAcEtIOUs

reply to fAcEtIOUs
TK is ok with encryption when it suits corporations, but against it when it comes to consumer privacy, such as peer to peer systems. Don't take it too seriously its his job.

Usually i would also be against more regulation, but the monopolistic cable world really needs reform, or instead of that perhaps an open network for competitors.

Like many people, i have only ONE choice for television and internet, and its not a very good one.

reply to fAcEtIOUs
If the cable industry and CableLabs were not doing everything they can to hold back CableCARD technology and "Tru2Way" (another stalling tactic) this would not be a problem. Since you are tagging things, let's call cablers "communist" since they insist on central command and control, the lowest possible performance, the least amount of accountability and the highest amount of intimidation.

This is about as transparent as the argument that cable prices have dropped significantly 'when viewed on a per-channel basis'. Well, adding 200 fluff channels and duplicates so your divisor is higher does not lower the price no matter what those sharp NCTA accountants might say.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange.

reply to BosstonesOwn
It is when verizon and att are doing the same thing but only the cable companies are singled out.

reply to BosstonesOwn

reply to pandora

My cable system (Comcast) increased rates for basic cable, but took channels off. If we must go digital, I'd prefer that basic cable be mandated with QAM or that a limited basic be mandated which offers only local feeds via QAM for under $10 per month.

I don't really care that much about my cable, as I have DirecTV and don't watch Cable. However I'd prefer to not have constant rate increases. Rate increases with service cuts in service seems worthy of some FCC inquiry to me.

At some point the FCC may consider a digital crossover for cable. When that happens, it'd be nice to see all local channels and maybe stuff like CSPAN via unencrypted QAM.
--
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use."

reply to BosstonesOwn

reply to majortom1029
How is Verizon and at&t doing the same thing?

The same channels that were unencrypted when Verizon offered analog are still unencrypted in their digital form. Previously, I could receive 2-49 without a cable box from Verizon in analog. I can still receive 2-49 with my tv digital built in QAM tuner.

What the cablecos are doing is different, they are literally moving channels that were unencrypted and when making them digital, they are encrypting them. Now if cable were to simply migrate their channels to digital without encrypting those channels, then they are doing the same thing as Verizon.

I am not opposed to cable moving their channels to all digital, Verizon, Directv, and Dish network have been that way for a while, and soon OTA is supposed to be all digital as well, but the argument most people are making is that even with a TV with a built in QAM tuner they are unable to get the same channels they use to get before with cable. At least with Verizon the same channels you were able to get from day 1 without a set-top box, are the same channels you can get today without a set-top box, provided you have a digital ready TV.

Also at&t is setup completely differently as their TV service is purely IP and required additional equipment from the get go.

I know you are a to the death cable supporter, but hopefully one day you will see there is a difference and NOT EVERYTHING cable does is right, just like not everything Verizon or any other company does is right either, but in this case your example doesn't measure up, Verizon and at&t are not doing the same thing as the cablecos.

reply to fAcEtIOUs

Why not go ala cart? ....? Why not!

Grab the money, string up your lines, build your head ends, forge your contracts with networks and sell to your heart's will!

Now, there are two ways I can end this post, so I will use both.

1) When all your customers want 10 channels and your average bill is $15 per sub, let me know when you file for bankruptcy so I can buy your system up for pennies on the dollar and run it right.

or

2) When your customers find out that it will cost $5 per channel plus a base rate for the carrier/line, and they realize they're paying $45 a month for a small hand full of channels, and revolt against you,.. AND your other customers find no value in your service any more and cancel becuase those less popular channels, which do keep those customers happy and subscribing are gone.. well, again, I say, let me know. I'd like yo buy your system in a liquidation sale so I can run it right and make money.

Okay.. it's nice to want all these Utopian dreams like ala cart channels, "free" equipment, $5 internet services, constant upgrades, new guides, faster internet speeds, no installation service fees (ie: free labor and parts that they can keep) etc.. AND on top of that, choice of multiple providers (more than the average 2 or three providers which further erodes a much needed income base to operate from) and all the other un-sustainable wishes.. but keeping in mind these wishes.. how in the world is a business supposed to, well, STAY in business?

Guys, c'mon.. it's time to live in reality and grow up.

It's time to answer the question I posed above and do it honestly.. it's a valid question becuase YOU guys yourselves are asking and demanding it daily.. you guys OFTEN forget one very important part of the puzzle.. YOU! the customer.

I see two things.. you guys THINK you have have all the above becuase its the "let everyone else pay full service so I can have it for cheap" mentality.. or, you really simply forget that you, yourself, has no impact on the success of continued service.

Remember, you can reduce the bills and even the amount of customer competition, but the one thing remains.. the cost to string the plant to every customer for all providers is the same and comes with a cost. (Oh wait.. what's that answer.. muni fiber projects? group projects like Utopia? need I say more?)

reply to pandora
I don't want to see constant price increases in my food bill, gas at the pump, car insurance, medical co-pays, energy, clothing costs, and on and on and on..

So why is cable exempt? .. or why should it be? You have a right to not have pay TV service too, right?

reply to waiting4fios
So.. umm... now there is a movement for channel tier changes?? .. and the FCC has established rules (which is a joke anyway) for cable companies in moving channels?

The fact, about QAM clear channels, is that you're only supposed to get locals and tier 1 in the clear.. that's it.

You can not get a full basic cable line up on cable with a QAM tuner with out the tuner in a system that traps. Basic 1 and 2 tiers are controlled with traps.

Also, your post hints on something that just isn't right. You hint that becuase something has always been a certain way that any change form it is wrong.. ala, "at&t did it from the get go".. you are right that it's IPTV so they need equipment.. so I'll leave that alone.

So.. what if cable decided to stop anything on analog OR digital other than tier 1 and move the rest of their service to IPTV? Would you still think cable should have to use cable card technology? Should you be able to get your own box then? AT&T's iptv seems to have different rules on their service.. the thing is, you never know if 'cable' is about to make the same move to IPTV.. then what?

reply to BSD24
One correction. It doesn't say you have to be able to remove the card.. it states that the security has to be separable from the rest of the box's technology. The Moto and SA/Cisco boxes have cable cards, but they are sealed inside the box.

reply to fiberguy
Any time a company with monopoly power over consumers abuses that power, we can hope government will remediate on our behalf.
--
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use."