Time Warner Cable, Sinclair Deadline Looms → Re: The most SILLY part of this blog..

What KrK fails to realize or understand is that it all comes from the same source.. and to think that the content providers are going to make it any cheaper is ignorance to the facts.

So I'm still kinda trying to understand why he would say "Could it THE BILL?" when all it means is that people would go to the internet to pay MORE for less, only get it direct from the source who'd be willing to sell you piece rate at a higher price than you're paying the cable or satellite companies already.

Yea.. makes sense.

I DO get the overall amount of the check every month for the entire bill, but still, people running direct to the internet for content is the same is being half dead and running TOWARDS the light, and not away from it.

The content providers don't care if you get it from cable or direct.. if you go online and buy from smaller middle-men, you're going to pay a higher price as well.

In the end, the content provider wins anyway..

I don't fail to realize anything. The Internet allows users to watch only what they choose... and therefore, pay less if they choose to.

Yes, but the internet doesn't "care" which channel you are watching. The bandwidth still costs the same. It will cost as much (or more) in bandwidth fees to stream one channel as it does to have 100 channels multicast to you over cable. If you have 2 TV's, it will now cost you twice as much (even if both are streaming the same channel).