New FiOSTV Rate Hikes Push to get users under long-term contracts... Lobbyists for AT&T and Verizon promised consumers lower TV prices if State lawmakers eased their entry into the TV business by passing franchise reform laws. These laws help the telco bottom lines by eliminating build out requirements and in some cases stripping away consumer protections. It was an easy sell to a public so very tired of cable rate increases. The laws were even called "lower cost cable bills" by a none-too-skeptical press. Yet now that AT&T and Verizon are in the TV business, TV rates for both cable and telco operators continue to rise, as the two sides engage in non-price competition. U-Verse prices have risen twice since launch. This year alone Verizon increased FiOSTV prices by 7%, added a new $75 disconnect fee, and bumped the price for DVR rental. Users in our Verizon FiOS forum say that FiOSTV customers are being informed of another round of hikes. It's partially a push to lock customers down with contracts, as users who agree to a two-year triple play contract can lock in their TV prices at the current rates.
|
 | | AT&T? Why is AT&T mentioned so much in an article about VZ price hikes? Have they even made such hikes on their serivce? Just curious. | |
|  |  kapilThe Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL | Re: AT&T? I'm sure it's only a matter of time. Whenever the subject of screwing the consumer comes up, AT&T usually has something to do with it somewhere.
--
»PropertyMaps.com - Real-time, map based, nationwide MLS property search! | |
| | | | There is one instance that I can think of from reading the UverseUsers news section: »www.uverseusers.com/content/view/86/8 (Disregard the post date, as Feb 12th was when the site was redone, so when the old news articles were ported over it changed the date on them) | |
| |  morboComplete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000
 ·Charter
| because they are doing the exact same thing as Verizon is doing with Fios, raising tv rates despite telling the public that rates would fall if they were given a chance to build out. it's easy to connect the dots when the similarities are so clear. | |
|
kapilThe Kapil
join:2000-04-26
Chicago, IL | Idiots! Who are the idiots who believed the telco-tv-will-lower-costs bullshit?
I think we should make women in charge of all the regulatory bodies because they are quite used to this strategy that is used by drunk guys in bars...say anything to get you to strip and bend over.
Did ya' really think that VZ and T were all upset because they saw poor consumer being screwed by Comcast? If they were upset, it's only because they wanted to join in and make it a threesome and screw the consumer a little harder.
--
»PropertyMaps.com - Real-time, map based, nationwide MLS property search! | |
| |  needforspeed59Cruise Ship Just Passing Through
join:2001-05-02
Glendale, AZ | Re: Idiots! Well, DUH! | |
| |  en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | When has TV service (Telco or Cableco) ever gone down ?
The only thing that has ever made it appear to have gone down is:
1. Bundling with HSI/DSL and/or voice
2. Throwing in cr@p channels (basically paid advertisements or the 'watching paint dry channel' )
I need to get a decent antenna and just do broadcast HD.
I agree all of them want money.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
| | |  DotMac4Shill H8rPremium
join:2007-10-26
Huntington Beach, CA | Re: Idiots! said by en102:I need to get a decent antenna and just do broadcast HD. That's what I did...set up a UHF antenna and 2 MCE boxes...then cancelled E*. The money I'm saving pays for Blockbuster online and I still have $80/mo left over. CATV/DBS programming is overpriced crap. | |
|
|  ThrowDemsOutIf you can't convince 'em, confuse 'emPremium
join:2002-03-03
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:4 | said by kapil:Who are the idiots who believed the telco-tv-will-lower-costs bullshit? TV rates are still high because the nexus of control is with the content providers and not with the access providers. Hollywood and the 4 major entertainment companies control prices. Having the telcos deliver TV in addition to cable and satellite has not changed that fact at all.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page
| |
| | |  MadMANNPremium
join:2005-08-19
kudos:2 | Re: Idiots! said by ThrowDemsOut:TV rates are still high because the nexus of control is with the content providers and not with the access providers. Hollywood and the 4 major entertainment companies control prices. Having the telcos deliver TV in addition to cable and satellite has not changed that fact at all. Exactly. However, nobody here wanted to believe anything other than the evil cable company wants to take their life savings.
When FiOS was a new topic here, all of us involved in the industry warned that prices were set by the providers. The MSO's have to make a profit and charge accordingly. Verizon is no exception.
The proof now is in your FiOS bill. Welcome to the TV biz, VZ! | |
| | | | | | Re: Idiots! said by MadMANN:said by ThrowDemsOut:TV rates are still high because the nexus of control is with the content providers and not with the access providers. Hollywood and the 4 major entertainment companies control prices. Having the telcos deliver TV in addition to cable and satellite has not changed that fact at all. Exactly. However, nobody here wanted to believe anything other than the evil cable company wants to take their life savings. When FiOS was a new topic here, all of us involved in the industry warned that prices were set by the providers. The MSO's have to make a profit and charge accordingly. Verizon is no exception. The proof now is in your FiOS bill. Welcome to the TV biz, VZ! So if cable was so powerful, and at one time, the only game in town, why didn't they use that leverage to keep rates low? | |
| | | | | MadMANNPremium
join:2005-08-19
kudos:2
1 edit | Re: Idiots! said by moonpuppy:So if cable was so powerful, and at one time, the only game in town, why didn't they use that leverage to keep rates low? That statement kind of insinuates that cable is somewhat responsible for FiOS rate hikes. I don't know if that was your intent, but it would be pretty ridiculous to believe that IMO.
If you notice, rates increased the most once satellite offered competition. At that point, more and more content surfaced and people had another option to get that content. Meanwhile, the consumer made the demand for certain networks much higher. The more demand, the higher the price. Basic economics. And the MSO is not going to eat that cost. They are in business to make money.
Take the recent Big 10 controversy. Do you think that without the consumer demand they would have the balls to ask for the ridiculous amounts of money that they ask for? When ESPN started out they cowered and begged the cable companies to carry them. Years later when they developed a must-have standard from the consumer and satellite was competing, prices went through the roof. Then it became a bundle situation where the company who owned the in-demand content would threaten to pull the more popular programming and not renew contracts if the MSO didn't carry 5 or 6 of their other upstart content channels. Meanwhile, consumers figure if company x cable provider didn't carry what they want, then they can go to company y satellite provider to get it.
Also, when cable was the only game in town, the industry was much more regulated and the content choice was not as bountiful as it is today. However, people obviously wanted the competition and more choice of content, so they had to deregulate to make room for said satellite competition.
One thing good about VZ being such a large company and getting into the TV business is that it brings to light what cable companies have been trying to explain for years now.
Trust me, this is only the beginning of VZs TV rate increases. They have huge amounts of overhead to pay for in the building of infrastructure right now, not even including what they have to pay for content. | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Idiots! What I am saying, and have been saying for a while now, is why don't the cable TV companies tell the truth as to why rates go up. They blame network upgrades but many times it is content and the must carry rules.
If this were explained to the customers, I can almost guarantee you that the public will side with the cable companies BUT will turn if rates go up anyway. Customers may have short memories but they are not stupid. | |
| | | | | | | MadMANNPremium
join:2005-08-19
kudos:2 | Re: Idiots! Anytime I see a rate increase letter from any MSO (and I have worked for a few) it usually has two major points: Price of content and cost of network upgrades and maintenance. Both of which, BTW, are valid. I mean, show me the last rate increase letter you received and show me where they omitted content price as a reason for the hike.
They could explain in detail till they are blue in the face, but the average customer only knows that their bill is going up. The logo on the bill is the MSO and what is right in front of them, so that's who is going to be the first on the list to blame. They are not going to call Viacom and tell them to shove it.
Again, with the Big 10 thing as an example, I don't know the exact numbers, but it seemed to me that the public was divided 50/50 as to who is to blame. But in the end, the company who actually collects their money is the easiest and most obvious target. | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Idiots! I have NEVER seen a letter explaining a price increase due to content. I have had Comcast for 5 years. | |
| | | | | | | | |  MrMasterjetsetterPremium
join:2000-12-16
St Thomas, VI
 ·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Virgin Mobile Br..
| Re: Idiots! said by moonpuppy:I have NEVER seen a letter explaining a price increase due to content. I have had Comcast for 5 years. You must be young. Only five years of cable company hell? If I only had 5 yrs worth I'd probably would have more hair on my head due to less stress! | |
| | | | | | | | | MadMANNPremium
join:2005-08-19
kudos:2 | If you post the last rate increase letter you got (which should be pretty recent) I will post the one distributed in my area. | |
|
| | | | | |  marigoldsGainfully employed, finallyPremium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
kudos:1 | Cable companies are limited by their contracts with content providers. They can say that the price of content went up, but they cannot disclose how much, who increased their rates, are what percent of the increase is due to rate increases. | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Idiots! said by marigolds:Cable companies are limited by their contracts with content providers. They can say that the price of content went up, but they cannot disclose how much, who increased their rates, are what percent of the increase is due to rate increases. I think they can say a lot more if they wanted to.
There was a story years ago that was going around a syndication convention for TV shows. Stations were upset because in order to buy the popular shows, they were being forced to take non-popular ones AND broadcast them at certain times. Of course the production companies saw nothing wrong with it but the TV stations were complaining.
I still say the cable companies can flex a little muscle when dealing with content providers. | |
| | | | | | | | | MadMANNPremium
join:2005-08-19
kudos:2
2 edits | Re: Idiots! said by moonpuppy:I still say the cable companies can flex a little muscle when dealing with content providers. And they do. I know I keep bringing up the BTN, but it fits well in this discussion.
Comcast flexed their muscle and said, "We'll carry it, but it's gonna be in a sports tier."
BTN said, "That's bulls**t! Put it on your standard lineup!" Yet, they wanted an nice $1.10 per sub.
If you haven't noticed, Comcast got LOADS of grief from Big 10 fans over that and lost a few because of it.
In that situation, we are talking about one single specialty channel. However, imagine dealing with a must-carry like TBS or ESPN. Viacom says, "If you don't carry CMT2, we'll pull ESPN, the Nick's, the MTV's, and the VH1s." What is a MSO to do in that situation? Dish network lost many customers in just a few short weeks over that very battle just a couple of years ago when all of those channels were pulled because they didn't like the terms of the deal. You know what happened after the dust settled? The channels came back and everyone's Dish bill went up a couple of bucks. Who flexed their muscle and won then?
Everyone pictures big cable as all-powerful and they are very powerful to a point. But the content companies carry just as much weight and more in some situations. But, again, people don't see beyond the logo on their bill.
The content providers' power came from competition: the very thing that was supposed to benefit the consumer. And benefit, it did. There's certainly more choices, but those choices come at a price. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Idiots! And that shows the sheer stupidity of Dish and the cable companies.
I'll bet if you, the cable and dish companies, actually went on a public relations blitz explaining why their bills went up because of content, the public would respond favorably. If the content companies pulled the programming anyway, explain to the customers how "bad" the content companies are treating them and the consumers.
You have a captive audience with your methods of delivery. Use them to your advantage. | |
| | | | | | | | | | MadMANNPremium
join:2005-08-19
kudos:2 | Re: Idiots! said by moonpuppy:I'll bet if you, the cable and dish companies, actually went on a public relations blitz explaining why their bills went up because of content, the public would respond favorably. If the content companies pulled the programming anyway, explain to the customers how "bad" the content companies are treating them and the consumers. You have a captive audience with your methods of delivery. Use them to your advantage. Dish network did exactly that. They went on a campaign frenzy trying to gather support BEFORE those channels were pulled. And guess what? Viacom went on a anti-Dish frenzy. They had their medium as well to use to their advantage. Comcast continues to do the same with BTN. It didn't make much difference with Dish, and Comcast isn't getting a lot of sympathy from BTN fans who want the channel.
You keep saying that MSOs should get the public on their side by giving this info to the public. Every time there is a rate increase or a channel not added to a lineup they try to explain this. The consumer base in this business is very apathetic, however, and only wants what they want when they want it. And if a cable co can't provide it, they are the evil company. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Idiots! said by MadMANN:You keep saying that MSOs should get the public on their side by giving this info to the public. Every time there is a rate increase or a channel not added to a lineup they try to explain this. The consumer base in this business is very apathetic, however, and only wants what they want when they want it. And if a cable co can't provide it, they are the evil company. I have seen this done twice EVER in my area. Both times ABC was the subject and this happened once in the 80's and once in the 90's BEFORE I had cable. It was well publicized on the local TV stations. Otherwise, the cable company rolled over and took it.
And, I suspect, one reason the cable companies don't fight too hard is because it would help those who want ala carte rules in place. | |
| | | | | | | | | | MadMANNPremium
join:2005-08-19
kudos:2 | Re: Idiots! said by moonpuppy:And, I suspect, one reason the cable companies don't fight too hard is because it would help those who want ala carte rules in place. You are entitled to believe what you want. The truth is, is that content providers must sell their content on a per-channel basis, rather than selling a group of channels to MSOs for ala-carte to become a reality.
The NFL Network and the BTN are networks that want ridiculous amounts of money AND want EVERYONE to pay for them. Both of these channels are only good for about 4 months out of the year. And these are just single networks. Now picture Viacom who wants to make the same or more amount of money, selling each individual network. You think rates for those channels are high now?
Again, these things come at a price. You want ala-carte? Well, that's great, but you will pay for that too. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Idiots! said by MadMANN:said by moonpuppy:And, I suspect, one reason the cable companies don't fight too hard is because it would help those who want ala carte rules in place. You are entitled to believe what you want. The truth is, is that content providers must sell their content on a per-channel basis, rather than selling a group of channels to MSOs for ala-carte to become a reality. The NFL Network and the BTN are networks that want ridiculous amounts of money AND want EVERYONE to pay for them. Both of these channels are only good for about 4 months out of the year. And these are just single networks. Now picture Viacom who wants to make the same or more amount of money, selling each individual network. You think rates for those channels are high now? Again, these things come at a price. You want ala-carte? Well, that's great, but you will pay for that too. It's funny how Comcast will fight against NFL but not ABC/Disney/ESPN. 
Ala carte is the ultimate form of capitalism. If people want the channels, they will thrive. If not, they go bye bye. | |
| | | | | | | | | | MadMANNPremium
join:2005-08-19
kudos:2 | Re: Idiots! said by moonpuppy:It's funny how Comcast will fight against NFL but not ABC/Disney/ESPN. Ala carte is the ultimate form of capitalism. If people want the channels, they will thrive. If not, they go bye bye. It's not so funny. It's actually quite simple. It's much easier to fight a specialty network that offers one single type of programming that caters to a fraction of a subscriber base for a quarter year than it is for a much larger content provider who offers incredibly diverse and popular programming that caters to 100% of the subscriber base on different networks all year 'round.
As far as ala-carte is concerned, I, personally am not against the idea, but a LOT of changes in the industry as a whole would have to be made before it can even be considered. What I do NOT approve of, is any law that chases after the MSOs to offer it without chasing after the content providers to change their ways as well. If they only go after one without the other, the consumer can not benefit at all where pricing is concerned. | |
|
| | axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC Reviews:
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| Access providers aren't helping themselves any by lobbying against a la carte regulations.
Entertainment companies are only as good as their product, and they're obviously producing something people want a lot. Something like ESPN is a natural monopoly, like Microsoft I guess, and they're doing what they can to keep it. But if they start sucking (a la Vista) they will lose their position quickly. Exclusive deals don't last forever.
If the content is worth it, people will pay for it. If not, they won't. The whole bundling thing is used to make people pay for things they don't want, to get something else they do want. But it makes the ESPNs too powerful, because they're essential to the bundle. By going a la carte, they are only worth what people will pay, and no more. The course of channels that people choose can be as cheap or expensive as they want, avoiding the "necessary" price increases if they want by cancelling the ones that cost too much. | |
| | | | ThrowDemsOutIf you can't convince 'em, confuse 'emPremium
join:2002-03-03
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:4 | Re: Idiots! said by axus:Access providers aren't helping themselves any by lobbying against a la carte regulations. The problem is that the proposed a la carte regulations would only be applied against cable companies by Martin and the FCC. If a la carte is expected to work they need to be applied to Hollywood(would need a law passed by Congress) that prevents them from issuing bundled content. And that will NEVER happen. So I don't blame the cable companies from resisting - they would still have to buy bundled packages from the content providers, but if Martin has his way, then have to sell the bundles broken up and a la carte. A sure recipe for financial disaster.
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page
| |
| | | | | axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC | Re: Idiots! I've never heard them make that argument. They shouldn't have to buy bundled content though, if that's true. Congress loves bundled content though, just look at all their appropriation bills. | |
|
|  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | said by kapil:Who are the idiots who believed the telco-tv-will-lower-costs bullshit? And if there were still regulations in place, there would be no FIOS and cable TV would continue to have no incentive to improve service.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
| | | | | Re: Idiots! said by pnh102:said by kapil:Who are the idiots who believed the telco-tv-will-lower-costs bullshit? And if there were still regulations in place, there would be no FIOS and cable TV would continue to have no incentive to improve service. DING DING DING!!!!!!!!!!!!! WE HAVE A WINNAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | |
| | | DotMac4Shill H8rPremium
join:2007-10-26
Huntington Beach, CA | Cable has improved service? News to me. | |
| | | |
1 edit | Re: Idiots! Uhhh... are you referring to recent times or in general? I think it's absolutely abhorrent to say that cable has not improved it's service. Look at all of the choices you have for your viewing pleasure. They could say F*** you to the programmers and have a limited selection (keeping prices low but options even lower), but instead they get as many stations as their bandwidth can carry for their customers. It's never enough, yet "there is never anything good on." They have brought true On Demand to their customers. Would you have thought 20 years ago that you would be able to turn to a channel with a set top converter box and select a TV show or movie of your choice, when you want, and watch it at your own pace? Did you ever think that you could purchase a pay per view movie through your cable box and keep it for 24 hours, watching it as many times as your little heart desires, all through the box? Not too long ago you were told "the installer will be out sometime next Tuesday, so wait for him all day," but now you are given a 2 hour time frame, with a promise that the tech will call you when he is on his way, and an on-time guarantee (at least thats how it is with my cable company). So quit being such a pessimist and acknowledge that cable companies have made huge strides (the same goes for telco's, yet around here people speak of them often).
It's pathetic how much people refuse to accept that cable is better than it used to be. Some people have never even had cable because of something that happened to their parents before they were born, yet they talk about how bad cable is. Some people had a bad experience a decade or 2 ago and refuse to try. Then some people do try, yet they go into it expecting bad things to happen and they dissect and examine everything, creating their own bad experience. You make it what you want... if you go into the situation expecting positive results chances are that you will have a positive experience.
It's a fact that people talk little about positive experiences but talk openly and often about bad experiences. It's natural that a company with millions of customers will have negative feedback. I can assure you that if every customer that had a good experience or a better than bad experience were to get online and blog about it you would spend years reading it all. I challenge you to prove me wrong. | |
|
| | | said by kapil:Who are the idiots who believed the telco-tv-will-lower-costs bullshit? I think we should make women in charge of all the regulatory bodies because they are quite used to this strategy that is used by drunk guys in bars...say anything to get you to strip and bend over. Did ya' really think that VZ and T were all upset because they saw poor consumer being screwed by Comcast? If they were upset, it's only because they wanted to join in and make it a threesome and screw the consumer a little harder. I could live with us women in-charge since most of us know B.S. when we see it.
--
Saving the world keeps me busy. However, I find Earth very primitive from my home planet of Krypton.
-Supergirl | |
| | |  ropeguruPremium
join:2001-01-25
Grafton, WV | Re: Idiots! said by supergirl:said by kapil:Who are the idiots who believed the telco-tv-will-lower-costs bullshit? I think we should make women in charge of all the regulatory bodies because they are quite used to this strategy that is used by drunk guys in bars...say anything to get you to strip and bend over. Did ya' really think that VZ and T were all upset because they saw poor consumer being screwed by Comcast? If they were upset, it's only because they wanted to join in and make it a threesome and screw the consumer a little harder. I could live with us women in-charge since most of us know B.S. when we see it. So Hillary shouldn't be elected... Thanks for agreeing... 
»politicalhumor.about.com/library···tman.htm
--
FWD#: 223611 | |
| | | Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| said by supergirl:I could live with us women in-charge since most of us know B.S. when we see it. I dunno about that one, Supergirl. I know one woman that a lightbulb can beat. | |
|
| dubluv
join:2007-11-23
Farmingdale, NY | i agree. too bad none of the cable/sat providers have the guts to offer a la carte pricing. i understand they want as much of our money as possible, but wouldn't it be better to be able to get more subs who are coming on because they don't have to pay for stuff they don't want? at first, we all jump at triple play etc, since we're dumping a land line co like verizon who charged as much for phone service as we get all three packaged together. of course, promo's only last so long, and then reality hits. like i said, instead of dealing with OTA (good, but not as good as the cableco/sat), why not just let us pick and choose what we want from the entire menu? afterall, the cableco's are paying for stuff that may not be worth offering at all, if only a handful of subs are buying it. just a thought... | |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Bad as a landline... worse than a cable company.. This will make people REALLY think before taking that "VIDEO" cable-tv plunge as a Verizon-TV customer. I say boycott the TV service for now, do not feed into these price increases by paying any and all costs the company wants to throw out there!
The more their cable-tv service lags behind internet and phone service, the more pressure there will be to reverse course on these ridiculous added costs of tv service much in the same way Verizon quarters and dollars you (yesteryear's nickels and dimes) for every dollar they can get their greedy red hands on with landline phone service (aka POTS).
| |
| |
See 9 replies to this post | |
 TzaleProud Libertarian ConservativePremium
join:2004-01-06
NYC Metro | FIOS Good thing I got the contract... But FIOS is still saving us $80/month for the next two years over going with the cable company + verizon for tv/internet/phone... Plus I get a free HDTV!!!
-Tzale | |
| | | | Re: FIOS You get a free HDTV by going with FiOS? Please, provide details... I want in on this.
--
three6ohchris | |
|
 dvd536as Mr. Pink as they comePremium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4 | Weeeeeeeeeeeeee now you get all the crap you get with VZW.
$75 disconnection fee? it takes like 5 secs to shut off a box via computer. the stockholders will LOVE this new wave of BS fees and hikes!
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
| | Reviews:
·Insight Communic..
| Re: Weeeeeeeeeeeeee I have been a VZW customer for years and years and years and I have never been charged one of the fees. The process is really quite simple. Pay your bill and there are no fees.
And with VZW, when I come up on a situation where there is a fee, like changing my number to a new phone before contract is up, the people at the counter wave those things. Been such a good customer for so many years and all.
I don't care for all of the VZ lockdowns and how expensive some things tend to be, but some of the stuff that they catch hell for just isn't right. | |
|
| | Wow With the basic service (premier without sports or movies, etc.) we get a $6 rate increase ($5 for service and $1 for the box) over the current rate of $42.99 and $4.99. That's a 12.5% rate increase or about 4-5x inflation. And I have the movie package and several outlets, so I'll be looking at a $10+ increase sometime next year.
My biggest beef is the "service repair visit charge" for $79.99. I've had a tech out twice already in the 7 months I've had the service. And my DVR and my guide don't work well. If I had to pay the $160 in fees for those two visits, I'd be paying like $22.86 more per month spread out. Yikes.
State regulators who gave VZ a pass with red lining and statewide franchising: can you hear me NOW?? | |
| | KenAF
join:2006-01-23
Arlington, VA
1 edit | Re: Wow said by Fiosfornow :
With the basic service (premier without sports or movies, etc.) we get a $6 rate increase ($5 for service and $1 for the box) over the current rate of $42.99 and $4.99. That's a 12.5% rate increase or about 4-5x inflation. And I have the movie package and several outlets, so I'll be looking at a $10+ increase sometime next year.
Did you read the post?
If you have FiOS now at $42.99, there are no price increases (aside from the previously announced DVR increase) until January, 2009.
The only people getting hit with the price increase in 2008 are (1) new customers who add FiOS TV service after January 18, 2008, and (2) older customers who were still paying the 2006 rates of $39.95/mo for TV and $11.95/mo for the combined Showtime/Starz/Encore movie package. Those customers will pay the 2007 rates ($42.95 and $12.95) in January.
If you sign up for a two-year commitment, your FiOS TV Premiere rate will remain $42.95 until January 2010. That's not bad for the 150 HD channels Verizon says it will have in the next year. | |
| | | | | Re: Wow said by KenAF:Did you read the post? Are you some kind of shill for Verizon? Because you are claiming that rates won't go up until Jan 2009, and that is incorrect. In fact, no where in that letter does it state that prices will not increase until January 2009. It in fact says 2008, which is 2 months away. It appears that you may want to re-read the letter your self. I did read the post and it says that the only way your rates will not increase is if you are already in a double or triple play bundle with a contract, then your prices won't increase until your contract expires unless you have additional services, then those go up in price anyway. If you upgrade to a triple play then your prices increase to the 2007 rates (which means that they are still increasing).
Here is a copy for you: »/r0/download/1···ease.pdf | |
|
| MadMANNPremium
join:2005-08-19
kudos:2 | said by Fiosfornow :
My biggest beef is the "service repair visit charge" for $79.99.
Man, I wish you would come over to the Comcast forum where people bitch about a $24 tech visit for someone to come and replace their own crap wiring. | |
| | | | 79.99 for a technician to fix something at your home??? WOW! What if it's obviously a VZ problem, is there still a fee? Also, do you have to have boxes for each TV with VZ? Cable sounds a lot more appealing to me... The cable company I have doesn't charge me for trouble calls, plus I don't have a box on most of my TV's, just the one in the living room, so I'm not paying anything per month for those TV's. doesn't sound so great to me. | |
|
| | Just get Symmetrical FIOS And use the Internet as your cable TV substitute! You can almost everything off the Internet!
ATM not live news or sports, but Im sure that is coming soon! | |
| | | new hikes Why is the consumer the only one who gets it. like your local politician actually believes the cheaper cable bill. He gets it. He does, he gets it in the form of a check from verizon and cables lobbyists. Bend over folks while your local politician takes you for the rube we all our. Your only chance is your vote, vote the assholes out during every election. Realize they no longer represent us only their own careers and best interests. | |
| | | | Re: new hikes DONT EVER forget it isn't about the Comsumer the company has to make money and survive plain and simple | |
|
 Rob AJets AFC ChampionshipPremium
join:2005-01-17
Pompton Plains, NJ | Great Rate hikes and I don't even have the service yet! | |
|  N3OGHCertified GLG-20Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1
·Verizon FiOS
| Pay TV just aint' worth it anymore.... Well, we've reached the point where pay TV (be it cable, satellite, or Fios) just isn't worth what we're being charged.
Between the internet, Netflix, and my DVD collection, I say who needs 'em?
I can get good HD content OTA with an antenna. Including most home baseball, football and hockey games for free.
If I want to catch a movie, I log on and get it in a day or 2 from Netflix, and I watch it on my terms.
I'm getting really tired of defacto financing athlete's salaries by paying for ESPN and Comcast sports net. Those bozos make too much money as it is.
It may be time to buck the jock-ocracy and ditch pay tv for a while...
Besides, I spend more time reading, listening to XM, and my iPod than I do watching TV, and all 3 of those combined are cheaper than my cable bill....
Pay TV in this day and age is no bargain.....
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… | |
| |
See 10 replies to this post | |
Tim2Premium
join:2006-06-19 | Verizon has to pay for it somehow Verizon has to pay for the rollout somehow. Just like the satellite companies make up for their seemingly lower prices by charging fees for all sorts of things, so will Verizon.
As far as content goes, I agree I've never seen a Comcast rate hike letter that doesn't mention increased programming fees.
Now you ask, why are the fees going up? It's because the networks want to offer better quality programming. Take the ESPN model... I remember when Australian Rules football was one of ESPN's mainstays. Had they stuck with that, their rates would be much lower. Instead, they went with the NFL, MLB, etc. All of which increased their costs, which were passed along to the subscribers.
The same is true of nearly every channel. I remember when Discovery showed whatever documentary they could get on the cheap. Then they got into original programming, which increased their costs by a lot. Again, guess who paid?
Another example is MTV, which showed largely free videos before they started producing their own shows... with higher costs.
All of these costs get passed along to the consumer, be it cable, FiOS, or satellite.
That's part of the Big Ten's problem. They were an untested channel that wanted the big bucks before they even went on the air and without general audience appeal. As I've said before, the Big Ten is proof that ala carte programming will never work... if BTN had any faith in it, they would have accepted the sports tier. | |
| |  NOYBSt. John 3.16Premium
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
kudos:1
3 edits | Re: Verizon has to pay for it somehow
Maybe they need to cut a few channels and force them to choose between not carried or pay-per-view. I am tired of being forced to pay for junk I do not want and do not want to watch in order to get what I do want. This is just another form of product tying to generate revenue from worthless products which the consumer would not otherwise purchase on their own given a choice. Given current technology capability this should be abolished and illegal.
| |
| | | | | | | Tim2Premium
join:2006-06-19 | Re: Verizon has to pay for it somehow said by tobycable1:You're referring to the ever popular cable a la carte system. Personally, I'd love to see ala carte programming. Once people start getting their cable bills, they'll start yearning for the "good old days."
It's funny... it seems most of the people on these boards clamor for more channels, while others want just the channels they want. With ala carte, both sides will see their bills rise. | |
|
| | who pays for it Imagine if you leave your job (quit or get fired) you losing 1 week salary.. ? Verizon gets 1/2 tank of fuel for your $80 That's the similar to the pickup set-top box fee. Imagine a taking an extra 7% of your money and throwing it down the toilet when gas prices are spiking towards new highs, and costs of living are going through the roof (tied to our energy dependent economy). Somehow CNN, ESPN, and all the high cost, must carry channels aren't worth the trouble.
In many areas, FIOS wants new customers. This is definitely NOT the way to get them by playing the rate increase customer lock-in agreement with EARLY TERMINATION FEES.. THIS IS NOT CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICE.. IT'S TV FOR FCC SAKES! The cable companies have been getting you and your children hooked on this dumbed down infomercial ridden (think weekends and nights for many channels) piece of garbage they call tv for well over 3 decades now, time to break the habit. Between bittorrent, youtube and free over the air tv.. you can break this habit once and for all.
I say, DO IT NOW before its too late!
Wouldn't you have something better to spend that on?-- what is coming to be $1000+ per year for PREMIUM CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE. | |
| | | | Re: who pays for it Right on, Right on. But if network neutrality is lost, it will be a lot harder to break the habit.
Someone mentioned commercials. What's up with that? Where is that money going. I remember way back before there was cable. One of the motivating factors for my mom when she decided to get it was no commercials. | |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| It's beginning... Cable started this way. No commercials. Low rates.
I'm a little miffed though. I was told that I would need to lock in my "triple play" pricing discount ($28/month less) by going to a webpage and "authorizing" the combination of Calling plan, Fios and Fios TV. And added my cellphone to the "one BIG bill" to boot.
The customer service rep on the phone (after I told her I wanted to save money, not spend more) then tries to convince me I need to add HBO and Showtime foe another $12.99/month.
???
Verizon moving their Cellphone sales staff in to Fios? | |
|  CylonRedPremium,MVM
join:2000-07-06
Bloom County | I said all along that FIOS/IPTV will be cheap to get customers in and then they will raise the rates - especially for FIOS TV to help pay for the fiber costs and return some money to the stockholder. AT&T is no different and never was different.
When the entry price is huge for an industry - this will be done every time. At some time XM/Sirius HAS to increase rates - they got people at a low price but the price is below cost and they lose butt loads of money.
--
Brian
Free health care is 100% a misnomer - it is not free and never will be free. | |
| NOYBSt. John 3.16Premium
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
kudos:1 | Disconnect Fee is $79.99, Not $75According to this notice from Verizon the disconnect fee is $79.99, not $75 as incorrectly reported in the original BBR article.
»/r0/download/1···ease.pdf
| |
| | | CANCELLED Called to cancel. The main reason I got the service was to offset the constant price hikes by cable and Satellite. Will use the money I save to take my wife out to dinner more often. Don't watch enough TV to warrant paying these continual price hikes. | |
| | NOYBSt. John 3.16Premium
join:2005-12-15
Forest Grove, OR
kudos:1
1 edit | Re: CANCELLEDExcelent and good high quality choice. You and your wife will get more value for the quality time than sitting in front of the 'tube'. Enjoy.
By the way with all these new LCD, plasma, etc. TVs can we still call them 'the tube'?
»Pay TV just aint' worth it anymore....
| |
|
| |
|
|
