 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Lame If Time Warner was really serious about having its customers skip fees, then it would offer lower priced service levels without the "costly" channels.
But of course, this is not the case. 
--
Blagojevich / Madoff 2012! |
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | said by pnh102:If Time Warner was really serious about having its customers skip fees, then it would offer lower priced service levels without the "costly" channels. But of course, this is not the case. .. and those contracts of carriage mean .... nothing? You do realize that to carry some channels, they're often forced to take those crap channels as well.. right? |
|
| Good response fiberguy. Also pnh102 let us not forget this is a publically traded company. So you would like to drive another company into the ground and have stock owners lose again? I have a better idea how about you shut up. |
|
| said by Heated Man:Good response fiberguy. Also pnh102 let us not forget this is a publically traded company. So you would like to drive another company into the ground and have stock owners lose again? I have a better idea how about you shut up. I have a better idea heated man. How about you shut up about stock owners losing out? |
|
| reply to fiberguy
said by fiberguy:said by pnh102:If Time Warner was really serious about having its customers skip fees, then it would offer lower priced service levels without the "costly" channels. But of course, this is not the case. .. and those contracts of carriage mean .... nothing? You do realize that to carry some channels, they're often forced to take those crap channels as well.. right? Sure, they mean something, but contracts expire and can be renegotiated at renewal time. However, I suspect that both the programmers and cable companies are happy with the current arrangement, since it maximizes profits for both. |
|
 Rogue WolfAte Your Homework, And Framed The Dog
join:2003-08-12
Troy, NY | reply to Heated Man
Stockholders are more important than customers? Who do you think gives stockholders that money? |
|
|
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | said by Rogue Wolf:Stockholders are more important than customers? Who do you think gives stockholders that money? Ummm.. it's the STOCKHOLDER that GIVES their money as an INVESTMENT.. you know what that word means, right?? It means you want money back for your investment..
By the way.. why are they important?? ... one question...
.... do you have a 401k? |
|
