dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
409
share rss forum feed


Bill Neilson
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Arlington, VA

I absolute agree with Karl about the last

statement he makes but I do wonder if the A La Carte option would kill off many channels like some seem to think.

I watch a good amount of TV and watch smaller channels every now and then. I actually enjoy having a lot of options.

I am just not sure those options may be around with A La Carte. Maybe I am wrong though, I dunno. I am sure the ESPN price will be absolutely stunning with ALACarte.


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
said by Bill Neilson:

statement he makes but I do wonder if the A La Carte option would kill off many channels like some seem to think.

I watch a good amount of TV and watch smaller channels every now and then. I actually enjoy having a lot of options.

I am just not sure those options may be around with A La Carte. Maybe I am wrong though, I dunno. I am sure the ESPN price will be absolutely stunning with ALACarte.

And I should subsidize your "many options"? If you like them so much, pay for them.


baineschile
2600 ways to live
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI
reply to Bill Neilson
i think a lot of shows became popular on smaller networks, because people had access to them...off the top of my head...mad men, breaking bad, jersey shore (unfortunatly), queer eye

if we had a la carte options, those might not have existed.

i am torn on the subject.


Dolgan
Premium
join:2005-10-01
Sun Prairie, WI
Reviews:
·Charter
reply to 88615298
Well said. The ridiculous part is that with all of these so called channel choices is the amount of reruns and paid advertising they show. The industry is spreading the myth of how much it cost to create new content when they primarily show the same programs several times a day for weeks on end. They then move the same cycle to their 2nd or 3rd channels. Furthermore, it seems we get to pay for more "paid advertising slots" that can take up 30%+ of programming time on a many of these channels.


firephoto
We the people
Premium
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA
reply to baineschile
said by baineschile:

i think a lot of shows became popular on smaller networks, because people had access to them...off the top of my head...mad men, breaking bad, jersey shore (unfortunatly), queer eye

There are very few actual small networks with slots on cable and satellite providers. The little niche channels are run by huge media outlets that don't want to step outside of the prime time box they shove down everyone's throat. With DVRs available almost universally there is no point in a live viewing schedule for most programming that isn't actually live. Stream it the night before and put a hold on it till the broadcaster wants it seen then everyone who wants to see it brings it up from the dvr.

It all just needs a little change of the ways and some coordination between those with the tech to do it and those with the content.
--
Say no to JAMS!

elefante72

join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

1 edit
reply to baineschile
Well keep in mind there are like 5 companies that control all of cable TV, so it's not like the mom and pops are trying to break into cable. Almost every mom and pop got run off simply because they got squeezed off BY consolidation.

It could take nothing for these guys to move TV shows around or sprinkle them selectively among their stations to get a certain viewership.

For instance if I didn't sub to cable I can get all of the old Mad Men on netflix and this season on whatever VOD for $20. I could always wait a year for when it is free...

So lets go over your list:

Mad Men, Breaking Bad (Cablevision-> Rainbow -> Public Company) -> AMC
Jersey Shore -> MTV, owned by Viacom
Queer Eye -> Bravo, FLN (Bravo was AMC, FLN is Scripps Network) Bravo is owned by COMCAST

OK:

AMC: (AMCX)
Scripps: (SNI)
MTV: Viacom (VCX)
Bravo: NBCU -> Comcast (CMCSA)

So you can see that these are not little old poor mom and shops, these are publicly owned Fortune 1000 companies whose sole responsibility it to take as much money from you as possible.

Take Univision -> it was public until it was purchased by big VC capital: In March 2007, Univision Communications, Inc. was sold to Broadcasting Media Partners, Inc. which includes Madison Dearborn Partners, LLC, Providence Equity Partners Inc., TPG Capital, L.P., Thomas H. Lee Partners, L.P., and Saban Capital Group Inc.

Take your lowly ESPN owned by a small companies: Hearst, and Disney

Lets take some women's channels:

Hallmark (Hallmark International) -> Crown (CRWN)
Lifetime - Hearst/Disney
Lifetime Medical Channel ->Viacom
Oxygen Networks -> NBCU -> Comcast
WeTv -> Lifetime channel -> Hearst/Disney
Style Network -> NBCU -> Comcast

AA:

BET -> Viacom (VCX)

WBLK - The minority radio station in my town is owned by TownSquare Media which owns over 150 channels based out of Greenwich, CT. I don't know if you have been to Greenwich but my brown skin qualifies as the help.

I don't see many minorities or poor souls scrapping by in this list, DO YOU?????
Expand your moderator at work


Bill Neilson
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Arlington, VA
reply to 88615298

Re: I absolute agree with Karl about the last

said by 88615298:

said by Bill Neilson:

statement he makes but I do wonder if the A La Carte option would kill off many channels like some seem to think.

I watch a good amount of TV and watch smaller channels every now and then. I actually enjoy having a lot of options.

I am just not sure those options may be around with A La Carte. Maybe I am wrong though, I dunno. I am sure the ESPN price will be absolutely stunning with ALACarte.

And I should subsidize your "many options"? If you like them so much, pay for them.

I do. I fail to see your point.