[AZ] Rate Increase
I am subscribed to receive more than 200 channels for video and many other music channels. Why so many? Because I am forced by your practice of bundling channels and tier offers. I have never listened to any of the music channels and routinely I do not watch more than 20 of the many video channels I get. You make me pay for things I do not need or want.
But it is not only you doing this to their customers; there is no way for customers to really shop the market for a better deal; you, the cable/satellite industry, have us in your hands and therenothing we can do as customers.
It is hard to believe we, as citizens in this country, can not do a thing to protect us from your unfair business practices.
Blame the content owners like Disney for the forced bundles, not the cable system operators.
|reply to DonP |
Cable operators have a lot of clout and could easily leverage networks to reduce prices and/or packaged channels. They choose not to because in the end, they're just rolling in the $$$$$ and couldn't care less.
Oklahoma City, OK
|reply to DonP |
Thew biggest thing they could do to fix the problem is to give people a little more choice in the grouping. Go look up directv's SMA pricing.
Each network packages the channels together and sell as a group. The most expensive one you are paying for is the ESPN channels. If you watch sports thats fine but WHY am I paying for your sports?????
I used to deal with a headend and the SMA groups and channels that are from the discovery networks like the science channel, destination america, velocity, animal planet, and many more are the CHEAPEST package. With a Headend you pay for a minimum of 100 subscribers and it's around 50 cents per subscriber to have the discovery network channels while the (SIX) ESPN channels run around 3.50 per subscriber.
My vote is if you want sports you can pay ten bucks per month for the ESPN channels and I can pay one per month for the discovery ones. . . not to mention that Cox just changed their programing and removed the science channel from the lineup it used to be in anyway. It wouldn't be that hard to package the channels the same way that Dierctv does with their SMA but ESPN networks would have a heart attack when people were given the option to drop then and their income drops by about 20,000,000 per month.
|reply to kv2009 |
said by kv2009:I think Cox has demonstrated that they do not behave this way and history proves it out
They choose not to because in the end, they're just rolling in the $$$$$ and couldn't care less.
Remember when the industry went into an uproar because Jim Robbins had the "gall" to stand up to ESPN and refuse a price increase and ended up winning?
Sadly, Cox is no longer comparatively a "big MSO". TWC has more than twice as many subscribers and Comcast five times as many! Even Charter is technically more than twice as big as Cox though they have relatively low penetration rate mostly presumed to be due to subscriber losses during their bankruptcy years.
The bargaining power goes to the heavy hitters, Direct and Comcast currently...content negotiations are presumably a big portion of the reason why Charter wants to merge with TWC which would leave us with two really big cable companies that dwarf the remainder of the industry.
jaykaykay4 Ever YoungPremium,MVMReviews:
|reply to DonP |
While there are many things you say that are true, the fact of the matter is that this is a business, a huge business. One cannot tell other businesses what to carry or sell. One can ask if something can be ordered, but that doesn't really change all that much. Cox is still a heavy hitter and continues doing what most companies do...make $$$. Why not? That's their business model. And the communication part of Cox is but a small part of the company as a whole. They do what car companies do, fashion stores do, and most businesses. They make models that they hope will sell, and if they don't, they change the models sooner than later. Cox does the same with its lineup. If it works, it works. Ultimately, if it doesn't, it will change to some extent. So far, they have found a business model that is working well for them. If we don't care for what they sell, we can determine not to use them. I did that for many years but ultimately found that what they have to offer, including their bundles, was better than what I could get elsewhere. It was ultimately my choice, and is ultimately yours as well.
Age is a very high price to pay for my maturity. If I can't stay young, I can at least stay immature!
|reply to DonP |
What really sucks, is you can't 'downgrade' your services via the web. I just spent the last 30 minutes poking around on just about every link I could find, and they only offer 'upgrades'.
I guess I'm off to their brick-n-mortar location to downgrade
you can always call them and ask for a "Loyalty discount" it at least reduces the price hike for a bit and locks that price for 2 years.
After calling them I didn't have to change a thing on my bundle