Justin Playfair
@198.231.x.x
| People buying the cable companies' party line
What has surprised me about this thread is how many people believe the argument that prices would go through the roof, but I guess P.T. Barnum was right about one being born every minute. Would individual stations cost more than they do now? Quite possibly, but the amount most people would spend would be less because they'd be paying for far fewer channels. Notice what was said by the only objective person quoted in the article: "Their fear is that consumers would not spend as much as they do now" (with a la carte). That's right: most people would wind up spending less money than they do now, and presumably would still be getting the stations they want (otherwise they'd probably spend as much as or more than they do now).
I currently pay $65 per month to get 300+ stations, but the number of those I ever actually watch is around 10-15 at most, and many of those I could receive for free with an antenna. Out of the 300 available, the majority fall into one of these categories that I don't care to receive:
•Sports
•Spanish language
•Digital Music (DMX)
•Shopping
•Religious
And so on. You like sports channels? Good for you, but don't insist that I should pay for them too so that you can pay less. You want your MTV? Fine, but none of us is obligated to subsidize your viewing habits. Maybe your mommy and daddy led you to believe that the rest of the world owes you the things you want, but it just isn't so.
P.S. If MTV is an important part of your viewing schedule, you may want to be careful labeling others as "morons" because you're probably throwing stones from a glass house. |
|
MPScan
Premium
join:2001-08-24
Boston, MA
| said by Justin Playfair:
P.S. If MTV is an important part of your viewing schedule, you may want to be careful labeling others as "morons" because you're probably throwing stones from a glass house.
Now, that is funny. I'm willing to bet $50 there are more than a few Real World fans with Ph.D.'s in Biochemistry. |
|
sparks
join:2001-07-08
Little Rock, AR
| cable has been a rip of for years. Nothing new.
notice how sports channels are the highest priced
on the list ?
as the cable guy said we can't charge each person for sports.
IF the sports people had to pay for it they could not afford it ????????????
if it goes pay channels on everything sports will loose a lot of people...to me BIG DEAL let all the $10 million a yr pros get a real job. |
|
rtcy
FACTS only please
Premium
join:1999-10-16
Beverly Hills, CA
 ·Verizon west (ex G..
 ·Verizon FIOS
| reply to Justin Playfair
said by Justin Playfair:
What has surprised me about this thread is how many people believe the argument that prices would go through the roof, but I guess P.T. Barnum was right about one being born every minute. Would individual stations cost more than they do now? Quite possibly, but the amount most people would spend would be less because they'd be paying for far fewer channels. Notice what was said by the only objective person quoted in the article: "Their fear is that consumers would not spend as much as they do now" (with a la carte). That's right: most people would wind up spending less money than they do now, and presumably would still be getting the stations they want (otherwise they'd probably spend as much as or more than they do now).
I currently pay $65 per month to get 300+ stations, but the number of those I ever actually watch is around 10-15 at most, and many of those I could receive for free with an antenna. Out of the 300 available, the majority fall into one of these categories that I don't care to receive:
•Sports
•Spanish language
•Digital Music (DMX)
•Shopping
•Religious
And so on. You like sports channels? Good for you, but don't insist that I should pay for them too so that you can pay less. You want your MTV? Fine, but none of us is obligated to subsidize your viewing habits. Maybe your mommy and daddy led you to believe that the rest of the world owes you the things you want, but it just isn't so.
P.S. If MTV is an important part of your viewing schedule, you may want to be careful labeling others as "morons" because you're probably throwing stones from a glass house.
WOW common sense in a world so low on it.
I just wonder if these guys saying the prices will go up are shills for the cable companies or actually getting paid to say it. either way any well read person in here can read about the multi houndred million dollar contracts for sports channels , just look at that fiasco DISH network went thru recently being hijacked into signing a new deal
if we only had a HONEST congress body and people with brains, but that is to naive of me.
if some of these clowns had been around the turn of the century we would still have 5 to 15 phones in the house one each to call someone using THAT particular company, until consumer rights were enacted that's how it was playing out.
soon you will have one cable/dish bill ALL or nothing, and your mortgage payment will seem like peanuts compaired to it . |
|
sparks
join:2001-07-08
Little Rock, AR
| I honestly believe that they started talking about cable regulation to get kickbacks.
THAT is what I think of our lawmakers.
Sports let the (fill in)ball nuts pay for their sports.
HOW about we all pay for HBO it should be $1.00 a month if everyone paid for it.
Discovery channel .25 cents if everyone paid .
FUNNY how we pay for commercials
weeeeeee now when will congress jump on dish people?
right after they spend all the kick back money they got from cable and have a new limo payment?
sparks |
|
