said by hbk4099:And all that would make sense if it didn't cost a cable provider anything to give you those broadcast signals. In reality, there are plant/facilities to build and maintain, personnel to pay, vehicles to fuel and insurance to pay. Programming costs are about 65% of the cost of what you get, the rest is the amount of what it takes to provide you with service. The difference of that total cost and what you pay is profit, something every company is in business for.
the thing I dont get is Cablevisions most basic package is broadcast basic, its supposed to have all the local channels. They having been charging between $10-18 for the past 7+ years for this level of service. So my question is if they were getting all the locals for free this package was pure profit. It wasnt until earlier this year when the broadcast channels I believe ABC being the first started demanding money. Why should Cablevision be able to profit off someonelses material?
Btw just so everyone has an idea Cablevision is not allowed to sell tv services for less then they pay for the services. So if we take this and know that they have a digital family package that includes everything in broadcast basic+family+iO digital which is normally like $70+ and know they offer it as a winback for people switching from another provider for as low as $25 as part of their triple play package you can see how much they are making off these packages. Also the gold which they charge $99 for can be had for like $65 as a winback. Cablevision could eat this increase and still be making money hand over fist and not have to worry about people leaving for other providers.