 RobIn Deo speramus.Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:3
1 edit | HD Programming.. Seeing how Comcast charges a $9.95/mo. "HD Technology Fee" that provides their customer with access to HD Channels, I don't see how they can justify that the increase in price is, in part, due to the HD Programming.
--
CheckSite.us | YourIP.us | Reverseip.us |
|
|
|
| Free Market? As many like to gloat, "let the FREE MARKET DECIDE" |
|
 plencnerbPremium
join:2000-09-25
Elgin, IL
kudos:2 | reply to Rob
Re: HD Programming.. If the price increase is due (in part) to an increase in the cost of providing HD programming, then why not raise that line item cost from $9.95 to cover the increase?
Example: If the total increase is $3.00, and $1.50 of that is due to increases in providing the HD channels, then $1.50 should be added to the "general" TV part, and $1.50 should be added to the HD Programming Charge (bringing it up from $9.95 to $11.45).
Now, my numbers in my example are made up, as I have no idea what they really are. But, my point is this: Since Comcast has on their bill the breakdown for specific items, and if those specific items cost more to provide, then why not increase only those specific items, and not the overall bill? This way, people can see exactly where the increase in costs are, and then make a choice to either keep those items, or make a change in what services they want.
--Brian
--
============================
--Brian Plencner
E-Mail: CoasterBrian72Cancer@gmail.com
Note: Kill Cancer to Reply via e-mail |
|
 tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3
 ·Comcast
| The linked articles point out.. That the portland/SW washington increase of 2.3% is less than the local inflation rate of 2.5%. so that doesn't seem so horrible.
On the other hand, one of the "improvements" they tout for my area transitioning to all digital is 15 new channels including THE JEWELERY CHANNEL...WTF? there are a number of reasons people stick with limited basic, quite a few of them are the economics of CATV, but the last thing on earth we need is the FRICKEN' JEWELERY CHANNEL.
If these shopping channels are so important why don't they pay for the HD fee, so we can really see the crap they are offering (should we be stupid enough to watch       ) |
|
| reply to seamore
Re: Free Market? said by seamore:As many like to gloat, "let the FREE MARKET DECIDE"
The only part of free market that is not working is the customer's willingness to disconnect services that cost too much. As long as you continue to pay the increases you are reinforcing that the market is accepting the price hike. |
|
| ShopNBC Really? Customers were demanding ShopNBC? Nothing worth the rate increase there. |
|
| reply to Rob
Re: HD Programming.. Comcast removed 24 HD channels alone in the last month in Philadelphia.
In Atlanta, they reshuffled movie channels into lesser-watched networks in HD. To say they added anything is pretty disingenuous. They didn't.
And they wonder why their customer satisfaction numbers are where they are? |
|
| reply to tshirt
Re: The linked articles point out.. hey - mama bear loves the jewlery channel. not everyone who watches tv posts on the internet. |
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Shrug Cut the cord. Problem solved.
Most of you who do this will be very surprised that you won't be missing cable TV much at all.
--
Romney/Ryan 2012 - Put a couple of mature adults in charge. |
|
| Oregon price hikes I'm getting hit with the second price hike this year here in Oregon. For me, they already raised limited basic channels and cable box rentals a few months ago.
Now they're swinging around to hit me up with higher Internet fees.
You got the older subscribers downplaying the price hikes, but from the POV of a 3 year customer, it totally sucks. 3 straight years with price hikes, around 25% increase for Internet (from around $40 to $50 - Performance Internet /w additional service). |
|
tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Comcast
| reply to pnh102
Re: Shrug said by pnh102:Cut the cord. Problem solved.
Most of you who do this will be very surprised that you won't be missing cable TV much at all.
Which is why I, only have Limited basic (no OTA signals reach me)
$2.90 a month for the local news is a good value, every other package offered is more than I'm willing to pay.
ComCast can charge what they want, but I can easily walk away, and the more that do, the more likely the prices will moderate. |
|
SunnyD
join:2009-03-20
Madison, AL | reply to pnh102
The problem with cutting the cord is that you're still tethered to the cord, so to speak. Cutting the "cord" generally involves internet service of some sort, which companies like Comcast will be more than happy to provide... at an inflated non-bundled rate replete with annual price hikes. |
|
 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | reply to seamore
Re: Free Market? said by seamore:As many like to gloat, "let the FREE MARKET DECIDE"
People that live in Comcast area have other cable companies to choose from? |
|
Reviews:
 ·Frontier Communi..
| content providers It would be nice if just one of the articles about cable rate hikes mentioned the role of the content providers in jacking up rates. Comcast, Time Warner, et. al, are not increasing their prices in vacuum. My new hometown is served by a privately owned regional cable company and our rates aren't much cheaper than Time Warner's offerings in my old hometown.
True a la carte offerings would go a long way towards addressing these price hikes, as the channels that demanded too much money would see decreased uptake. The problem is that true a la carte is not technically feasible for analog cable channels, traps are limited in their flexibility and truck rolls are required to install them. An exclusively digital cable television system would solve this problem, but at the cost of mandating set-top boxes for the millions of customers with older televisions.
One wonders why Dish or DIRECTTV haven't tried the a la carte model, their technology would easily allow for it, and they'd be able to increase their margins somewhat as people took less channels. Perhaps the contracts they have to sign with content providers don't allow for it? |
|
| reply to seamore
Re: Free Market? If human stupidity wasn't a common virtue then such systems would function accordingly. Yet since everyone wants handouts and don't want to be held responsible for their actions, the decision is done for us. |
|
 jmn1207Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1 | reply to BF69
Since the customer is unable to pay directly for the content that they want to view, the only real option in a free market sense is to completely drop pay TV. That is a tough choice to have to make for many of us. |
|
| reply to BF69
said by BF69:said by seamore:As many like to gloat, "let the FREE MARKET DECIDE"
People that live in Comcast area have other cable companies to choose from? I don't know. Ask those that tout the biblical "free market" slogan. |
|
| Poor excuses are better then none "hikes are necessary due to network upgrades and higher programming costs", but have plenty of money to buy NBC. |
|
 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | reply to tshirt
Re: The linked articles point out.. Usually, channels like the shopping channel, & the jewelry channel, the religious channels like EWTN, etc pay the ISPs to carry them instead of the other way around. That is why so many of these junk channels are in the lineup.
--
»www.mittromney.com/s/repeal-and-···bamacare
»www.mittromney.com/issues/health-care |
|
| Comcast price hike I always thought a company was supposed to use profits it earned to upgrade, not pre-charge customers so it can upgrade. Give a superior product, more people use it. More people use it, more profit. More profit, more money to upgrade. And so on. I guess just charge more for upgrades that need to be done, and then charge more for the upgrades because it has been upgraded. |
|
