1 edit | Pricing The problem is NOT with the programmers. It is with the insane price increases Time Warner puts on every year, sometimes 2 or more times a year, all the while decreasing the services they provide to us.
I say "B.S." to Time Warner. Take a fair 5-10% profit, instead of the 27% you currently take. Stop the insane bonuses to corporate execs, and just provide a quality, reliable service. It doesn't matter if it is 600 channels of nothing. Just deliver 50 or so channels of quality TV and reliable internet, without the constant price increases.
Maybe you could save some, by getting rid of the channels you recently implemented. |
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Why should they only take 5% of 10% profit? You don't think the people that invest into the company deserve payback on their investment?? You want to talk a price increase... cut out the investors and see what your bill does..
.. let me know how that works for you. 27% is a fair profit.
And also, now your about discrimination? Maybe some "gay" people like the "gay" networks... why not cut out the black channels.. why not the hispanic as well.. what else you want cut out?
Seriously...
What's 50 QUALITY channels to you may not be to others.. |
|
| said by fiberguy:Why should they only take 5% of 10% profit? You don't think the people that invest into the company deserve payback on their investment?? You want to talk a price increase... cut out the investors and see what your bill does.. .. let me know how that works for you. 27% is a fair profit. And also, now your about discrimination? Maybe some "gay" people like the "gay" networks... why not cut out the black channels.. why not the hispanic as well.. what else you want cut out? Seriously... What's 50 QUALITY channels to you may not be to others.. 27% is not a fair profit for a monopoly provider. 10% is considered quite healthy, so a monopoly should be in the range of 5-10%. |
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3
1 edit | Says who? and really.. what makes you think they're a monopoly anymore?? maybe in the wire line service arena.. but anymore, these days, you still have phone competing with wired service and you also have a very healthy satellite industry..
... but, really, if you want to start playing the game of restricting profits on companies WHILE competition is in play, just be careful what you ask for, because you WILL NOT like it.
Look at what AT&T did to IL when they wouldn't give them a state wide franchise.. AT&T decided to hold back on upgrades.. I know the undeserved residents of IL are pleased with that one.
You start with government control on profit, as you're suggesting, in this case, while competition exists.. just remember, you're going to see a MAJOR decline in service..
you're not going to win on this one.. and 27% is not unreasonable. Even non-profit organizations are required, by law, to retain more than 10% of what they take for operating expenses. |
|
 jsz0Premium
join:2008-01-23
Jewett City, CT | reply to Anon51
5-10% is too low for a capital intensive industry. Too much risk, not enough reward. I know people like to work themselves into a frenzy over corporate bonuses but most MSOs are publicly traded companies. Profits are going to share holders. If management is able to provide profits to the share holders they are of course rewarded. That's how capitalism works. |
|
