page: 1 · 2  |
 
Dagda1175
join:2001-06-17
Goleta, CA | Personal Responsibility? Morons. If you don't like MTV, use your v-chip. Thats what its there for. Don't make the rest of us pay more for a new system that lets you stop being an attentive parent. | |
|  | 
EL_TB
join:2003-05-03
Fairfax, VA | Re: Personal Responsibility? It seemed good to me until I realized I would probabaly get less channels and would have to pay more. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | dweeb
join:2002-06-23
Ferndale, MI
| Re: Personal Responsibility? said by rtcy  :
said by Nightfall :
said by EL_TB :
It seemed good to me until I realized I would probabaly get less channels and would have to pay more.
Fox Sports Detroit
ESPN
ESPN2
FX
Discovery Channels
History Channel
I wonder how much it is going to cost me just to get those few channels? You can bet the price is going to go up if they go a la carte. Would it be more worthwhile for me to stay with the current system?
no offense to you , most people are too easy to fool LOOK BELOW at these prices
»www.dsinps.com/alacarte.htm
this is how much ala carte costs right now to BIG C band Satellite users like me, and no it's not going to cost more.
fact is maybe a handfull of the less watched channels *MIGHT* die, but most are now so FULL of advertising that it's worse than regular TV, so what do we have to really loose.
as for Discovery Channels all I can say is they sure have gone DOWN HILL in the last 8 years!!!!!!!
Yes it will cost more. Right now you are riding the backs of all the satellite and cable users. | |
| | | | | | | | | | 
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
 ·Cox HSI
 ·AT&T Southwest
| I'm quite positive I could get by with just 5 channels:
Sci-Fi
TLC
Discovery
History
AMC
Between Sci-Fi and TLC I'd say is already 85% of my TV viewing now.
Even so, I know that in today's corporate mindset, they will not do *anything* that would save us money. No matter how it works out, or how they change it up, they would structure it to *increase* profits, not provide discounts.
I'll bet you'll see "offers" like this:
"Pick your own 10 ala carte channels for $29.95 a month, or take our bundle of 40 channels for $35 a month!" resulting in most people just taking the bundle.
Now, if the ala carte channels were priced appropriately, say $1 or less each a month, then most people would jump on that.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) | |
| | | | | DonLibes
Premium,ExMod 2001
join:2003-01-19
| Re: Personal Responsibility? said by KrK :
... in today's corporate mindset, they will not do *anything* that would save us money. No matter how it works out, or how they change it up, they would structure it to *increase* profits, not provide discounts.
I'll bet you'll see "offers" like this:
"Pick your own 10 ala carte channels for $29.95 a month, or take our bundle of 40 channels for $35 a month!" resulting in most people just taking the bundle.
That's a very good analysis but one factor that you should also consider is everyone has their breaking point. I recently reached mine when my local cable company hiked the rates a few more dollars.
Given the choice between 0 and $35, I reluctantly chose 0. If the cable company had offered me the $29.95 choice (as you suggest), I would've taken it and the cable company would've gotten $29.95 out of me that it isn't getting now.
Bottom line: it is in the company's best interest to offer a la carte pricing EVEN at higher per-channel rates. | |
| | | Megladon13
join:2003-09-05
Minneapolis, MN
| I think 2.50 per channel would be a good price for it. So, a .34 channel jumps to 2.50, well for the lot less i'd be watching i'd be ok. 4-5-9-11 & fox would have to come standard with it, and 5.00 for expensive stations like espn and other sports channels. I personaly dont give a rip about anything but nfl, and i can watch all i want to see on basic tv, but i'd like sci-fi, tech tv, discovery, history, total cost 10$ Quite a jump down from my 40$ a month currently. | |
| | DonLibes
Premium,ExMod 2001
join:2003-01-19
| said by Dagda1175 :
Morons. If you don't like MTV, use your v-chip. Thats what its there for. Don't make the rest of us pay more for a new system that lets you stop being an attentive parent.
It's not a matter of turning the channel. Right now, you're *forced* to pay for channels you don't want in order to get ones you do want. 15 years ago, this made sense. But with current technology there is no excuse for it.
The cable companies argue that rates would go up and diversity would suffer. But I do not find their logic compelling. (And I never asked for a v-chip either. Why the hell am I being forced to pay for it.) | |
| | | 
ATLJ
Go Braves
Premium
join:1999-12-24
Atlanta, GA
clubs:
| Re: Personal Responsibility? said by DonLibes :
It's not a matter of turning the channel. Right now, you're *forced* to pay for channels you don't want in order to get ones you do want. 15 years ago, this made sense. But with current technology there is no excuse for it.
This all depends on the prices they set for a la carte. I can see the cable and content companies complaining about this but then sitting in a back room figuring how to use this to screw the consumers again.
If I could get locals, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNews, Fox Sports, MTV, TBS, Comedy Central and Fox News for a decent price it would be great. Doubt anything will happen in a long time though...Weren't all the broadcast companies required to have HD broadcasts by now but it keeps getting delayed?
--
"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." --Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977 | |
| | | | 
Buggy
join:2000-10-24
Tampa, FL | Re: Personal Responsibility? One idea that is being pursued is an over the air solution/competition with cable/sat that has a small package of popular stations for cheap. Check it out here »www.usdtv.com/ | |
| | | 
yock
Eschew the False Dichotomy
Premium
join:2000-11-21
Fairfield, OH
edit:
May 31st, @10:27PM
| Digital Cable already provides for methods to password protect channels and ratings. V-Chip technology does the same for ratings systems on standard cable products.
I don't understand the logic in this. It's like people don't believe that the laws of capitalism apply to cable television just because it is a service and not a commodity. Look at the food industry, specifically fast food. Ever wonder why it's cheaper to buy the combo meal rather than the same items a la carte? Selling your meal as a package allows for some discount, as they know the next person will also be buying a package, and the next person and the next and so on.
Selling a la carte requires that they make profit off of every single item they sell.
Carry this over to cable television. If providers were required to sell you individual channels, they would be required to price each channel based on it's advertisement revenue, cost to carry that channel, and estimated subscriber base. Popular cable channels like ESPN and CNN would most certainly be priced outrageously, because they know that people will pay whatever it takes to view such channels, in much the same way that an upscale restaurant can change $30 for a steak.
Don't be stupid. Think about what a la carte pricing does for other industries before you all start touting it as the Holy Grail of cable television billing. | |
| | | | DonLibes
Premium,ExMod 2001
join:2003-01-19
| Re: Personal Responsibility? said by yock :
Look at the food industry, specifically fast food. Ever wonder why it's cheaper to buy the combo meal rather than the same items a la carte? Selling your meal as a package allows for some discount, as they know the next person will also be buying a package, and the next person and the next and so on.
Your analogy is flawed. You're assuming people WANT everything in the combo meal. That isn't always true. For example, for people who don't want the fries, it's cheaper to buy the burger and soda separately then it is to buy the combo meal.
When I take my family to McD's for example, we never get combo meals - mathematically, it just doesn't make sense. Same thing with TV packages.
Now it's true that a lot of people will eat fries if AND ONLY IF they get them at a bargain. But not everybody will. And it is these latter people that don't want to pay combo prices. Similarly, not everybody wants to pay combo prices for TV. That is the accurate analogy you should be using. | |
| | ParanoiaInc
join:2002-08-28
Tucker, GA
| said by Dagda1175 :
Morons. If you don't like MTV, use your v-chip. Thats what its there for. Don't make the rest of us pay more for a new system that lets you stop being an attentive parent.
Huh? How does this help me reduce the +$70/month bill for the desired four HD channels that DirecTV provides to me that are not OTA channels?
Oh yeah, it doesn't and you just missed the entire point behind a la carte!  | |
| | ackman
join:2000-10-04
Acworth, GA
·AT&T Southeast
| said by Dagda1175 :
Morons. If you don't like MTV, use your v-chip. Thats what its there for. Don't make the rest of us pay more for a new system that lets you stop being an attentive parent.
The v-chip never reallly gained wide acceptance and only served to lower the bar on programming content. Like the eternally blinking 12:00 VCR clock, most people don't know what the v-chip is, or even how to use it if their TV had it. I'm not sure I would be so quick to call them "morons", people are just busy in their lives and don't have time to explore techy stuff. I'm sure you'll do everything just right and be a perfect parent one day. | |
| 
reub2000
Premium
join:2001-12-28
Evanston, IL | To make up for this..... For every channel that goes up by 20x, there are 20 channels that I don't want. Channels like speed, hsn, that religios channel, most news channels, espn, fsn, | |
| | 
Jeremy341
Bye
Premium
join:2000-01-06
localhost
| Re: To make up for this..... said by reub2000 :
that religios channel
You only have one?!?! You should consider yourself lucky! | |
| | ParanoiaInc
join:2002-08-28
Tucker, GA
| I only want four, so how much should I pay? The bare minimum from DirecTV for this is contained within their HD Premium Package for $10.99, but this cannot be gotten without their TotalChoice package for $36.99. That's $47.98 I would have to pay MINIMALLY for four (4) channel I want.
Four channels:
Discovery HD Theater
HDnet
HDnet Movies
ESPN HDless
I had the HBO and Showtime HD channels, which were bundles in their respective HBO and Showtime packages for an additional $23/month. $23/mo for 2 more channels! | |
| Laggy
join:2002-05-07
Indianapolis, IN
| Only good if the price is right If I could get only sci-fi (rarely watch it), history, and discovery for $10-15, with no other costs other than my cable internet, which itself is overpriced. Then I would be happy.
Out of the 70 channels we do have I watch maybe 5. I'd love to be able to get some sort of discount and get just the 5 channels that I do watch. I know it would end up costing way more than I pay now though if such a system was put in place. | |
| | Joe12345678
join:2003-07-22
Des Plaines, IL
| Re: Only good if the price is right said by Laggy :
If I could get only sci-fi (rarely watch it), history, and discovery for $10-15, with no other costs other than my cable internet, which itself is overpriced. Then I would be happy.
Out of the 70 channels we do have I watch maybe 5. I'd love to be able to get some sort of discount and get just the 5 channels that I do watch. I know it would end up costing way more than I pay now though if such a system was put in place.
sci-fi kicks ass | |
| | dweeb
join:2002-06-23
Ferndale, MI | This is going to be a huge mistake. Its going to end up costing $40 to get 10 stations. Don't think the tv companies are going to take a loss. | |
| | 
wdoa
join:2001-10-16
Spencer, MA
·Verizon Online DSL
| About a year ago I canned all my "expanded basic" channels because the price was just getting ridiculous. I have the basic over the air channels, public access, and cspan and it's like $11 a month... If I were to get the expanded basic with CNN, Fox, Golf, etc... It would cost me close to $50 a month with Charter. Now if I could pick up CNN, History Channel, Discovery, and a couple others for a total cable bill say $25 a month I would take it.... $50 a month for expanded basic is too much, I know much of that money goes to the sports channel which I couldn't care any less about. Let the folks who watch ESPN's pay through the nose for it if they want it... I talked to a local cable marketing person a few months ago and they said over 50% of his budget goes to the sports channels. He would lose them but are afraid of a huge exodus to satellite if he did. So us folks who don't give a damn about sports are forced to subsidize the sports fans. | |
| RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs: | Have a better idea Boycott the greedy so-and-sos. Except too many Americans (US type) depend on the boob tube for various reasons.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. | |
| | 
72276539
Premium
join:2001-01-19
Atlanta, GA
| Re: Have a better idea said by RayW :
Boycott the greedy so-and-sos. Except too many Americans (US type) depend on the boob tube for various reasons.
YEAH! Like documentaries, scientific programs, history and other crap shows that are on the boob tube that I can't see by walking out the door!
--
some people believe in astrology others believe in technology some people believe in all those -ologies but i believe in swordfish | |
| | | | | | | | | ParanoiaInc
join:2002-08-28
Tucker, GA
| I already did this. I dropped the HBO and Showtime packages last month. I did this because the only reason I wanted them was for their HD channels. Thus, I was paying an outlandish $23/month for two (2) additional HD channels. I was called back on this and told them why and what they needed to do to correct for this condition.
I look at it like AOL trying to keep their revenue stream of dial-up customers. | |
| | | 
marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
| Re: Thats Discovery Channel Baloney That pricing is still based off of all the other subscribers out there subsidizing you.
The numbers discovery is using is based off dividing their break even revenue by the expected number of subscribers with a la carte.
In fact, you can definitely expect your rates to jump to $19/quarter for Discovery (same way that all the a la carte premiums are priced at the same rates on cable and C-Band) if there is a switch to a la carte across the board. C-band just happens to be small enough in numbers that a la carte programming on C-Band does not significantly affect the pricing model overall.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://whip.isca.uiowa.edu
Member: American Association of Geographers, American Geophysical Union, American Water Resources Association | |
| | 
insomniac84
join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN
| What a rip. I picked out the channels that I would watch. I would get more watchable channels with that a la carte for 15 bucks a month than I get paying 50 bucks a month for supposedly more channels than I would need. Claim a la carte will raise prices, but if the scare gets me 100 new channels for the same price or lower I will be happy. | |
| | ParanoiaInc
join:2002-08-28
Tucker, GA
| While you do bring up a good point SP, you neglect that by buying via BUD you act as a DBS provider yourself. DirecTV, Dish Networks, and Voom all have operating costs that is passed onto the consumer in their programming packages.
I agree that it should cost anywhere near what Discovery is saying it could wind up costing, and if they are right then I simply will continue to fight for a la carte but not bother with Discovery channel.
Their loss either way. | |
| | | 
rtcy
RTCY
Premium
join:1999-10-16
Norwalk, CA
·Verizon west (ex G..
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Thats Discovery Channel Baloney said by ParanoiaInc :
While you do bring up a good point SP, you neglect that by buying via BUD you act as a DBS provider yourself. DirecTV, Dish Networks, and Voom all have operating costs that is passed onto the consumer in their programming packages.
I agree that it should cost anywhere near what Discovery is saying it could wind up costing, and if they are right then I simply will continue to fight for a la carte but not bother with Discovery channel.
Their loss either way.
FACT is if it really costs more than what is being charged on BUD , they would charge it! as for the costs WE Big DISH USERS have to pay around 2000.00 to BUY the dish & receiver
Direct TV , DISH , and the cable companys AS WELL AS NPS get wholesale prices on these channels they in turn make a PROFIT reselling them to us so once again look at these prices you can get them in PACKAGES or ALA CARTE on Big Satellite Dishes
»www.dsinps.com/program.htm
looks at the packages then look at ALA carte, I've been buying both for 10 years, and by the way the prices per channels you see are the SUGGESTED RETAIL PRICE set by the channel owners not the resellers AKA direct tv, dish .... | |
| |
marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
| Those channels though are not being sold at cost. The major cable channels consider C-Band to just be a small market of marginal income and do not take fixed costs into consideration in the same manner they do with dish and cable. The content providers themselves have made this fairly clear (in addition to making clear their intent to eventually force out the remaining C-Band users).
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://whip.isca.uiowa.edu
Member: American Association of Geographers, American Geophysical Union, American Water Resources Association | |
| 
Morac
join:2001-08-30
Riverside, NJ
·Comcast
| A La Carte should lead to cable competition I think one of the reasons cable companies and some programmers are against a la carte channels is because they realize it could lead to competition which would eat into their profits.
The same technology that would allow buy cable channels a la carte, would also allow cable competition without laying down more lines.
Basically a la carte requires digital cable. It could be done with traps, but that really isn't feasible.
The thing about digital cable, is that it is just data. So just like your DSL provider can be different from the local phone company (which owns the phone lines) and in certain areas your ISP doesn't have to be your local cable companies, the cable company providing your channels doesn't need to be your local cable company. Your local cable company would charge another company a certain price for access to its lines.
Of course the local cable company would never do this willing so it would need to be mandated by the FTC or BPU just like how phone companies are mandated to allow competitors access to their lines.
If this came to pass then your local cable company could be Comcast, but the one providing the channels could be Time Warner or even the channel owner themselves.
--
The Comcast Disney Avatar has been retired. | |
| 
bokamba
Chengdu Rocks
Premium
join:2002-04-05
Falls Church, VA | Possible math behind the $6.33 figure Perhaps they calculate that if you got only the Discovery Channel, you would pay $6.33 per month. I bet if you ordered an a la carte package of several channels, the marginal cost of each additional channel would decrease. | |
| |
ATLJ
Go Braves
Premium
join:1999-12-24
Atlanta, GA
clubs:
| Re: Possible math behind the $6.33 figure said by bokamba :
Perhaps they calculate that if you got only the Discovery Channel, you would pay $6.33 per month. I bet if you ordered an a la carte package of several channels, the marginal cost of each additional channel would decrease.
That would make sense...they may have taken the total revenue they bring in now and divided by number of estimated subscribers if it was switched to a la carte...
--
"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." --Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977 | |
| | 
Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
 ·Site5.com
·AT&T Midwest
·Comcast
edit:
May 31st, @08:00PM
| said by bokamba :
Perhaps they calculate that if you got only the Discovery Channel, you would pay $6.33 per month. I bet if you ordered an a la carte package of several channels, the marginal cost of each additional channel would decrease.
Possibly
Maybe they are taking into account how many people would buy into their channel. Lets say, they have 10 people getting the package deal today at .60 cents. Thats $6 right there. Well, if they go to an a la carte system, only one of those 10 will buy into the channel. Henceforth, the price has to go up in that situation because they don't expect 1 in 10 to get that channel. Heck, it is educational after all. 
My wife and I love it. 
--
My Domain
Nightfall's Hockey and Life Journal | |
| 
tklown
join:2000-09-17
Sayreville, NJ | a shame A shame, one of the only good channels  | |
| 
impactstudio
join:2004-04-05
Vancouver, BC
| Not that easy... Not that easy at all..
This is how things currently stand, and, as I go on to say, the trend towards bigger content-providers pretty much ensures that, apart from legislation, this isn't going to happen anytime so. And do we really want more legislation?
A) Technological Difficulties
(Note: this first only applies to cable carriers)
In order to be completely a la carte, all stations would have to be digital, which means everyone would have to have a digital receiver. It has been legislated that US carriers will be 100% digital by 2006, provided that at least 80% of consumers have the technology to use these services. That's a pretty big 'if'. To have a la carte on a regular cable signal would require a physical filter for every single channel, and, while marginally technically feasible, the costs involved would render such a route pointless.
B) Contracts
Cable companies (and satellite companies) have contracts with the various networks as has been mentioned previously. These contracts vary from network to network and carrier to carrier, but since there are, in actual fact, very few content providers, any cable or satellite carrier that chose to make an issue over one or two 'unpopular channels' would instantly alienate the parent company, which would either take the carrier to court over contractual breakages or dis-allow acces to other, more 'popular' content, thus crippling the carrier by forcing customers to switch to a provider that did still have the 'popular', as well as 'unpopular' content.
C) I pay, You pay, We all pay for TV
Even if it was technologically feasible and the carriers didn't have contracts that locked them in to providing channel A together with channel B if they want the rights to channel C, bundling still makes some sense, at least with channels that are more "premium" services. It works like this:
Content Provider Inc. (CPI) owns channel Super TV©®TM which they agree to license to Medium-Size All-American Cable Co. (MSAACC). Now if Super TV©®TM is provided as a premium digital a la carte channel, CPI charges MSAACC $5.00/month for every subscriber to that particular channel, so MSAACC charges their customers $15.00/month to receive it.
Now if MSAACC provides Super TV©®TM to at least 10,000 customers, CPI charges them a flat rate of $30,000.00 ($3.00/customer). MSAACC, in order to ensure that they are providing the service to at least 10,000 customers, bundles Super TV©®TM with The All-'Friends' Network©®TM which they know most subscribers just can't get enough of. As well, because they get such a great deal now on Super TV©®TM and on The All-'Friends' Network©®TM (with whom they have a similar arrangement) and because they have less customer turnover on these services together then they would have if each was seperate (which also lowers their costs) they can afford to offer this 'tier' for the low, low price of $12.00/month.
The result is that if you hate Super TV©®TM but love The All-'Friends' Network©®TM or vice-versa, you are still getting a better deal then you would if you were only paying for the channel you like.
Of course, that's a pretty simplified assessment. The contracts & pricing structures are so convoluted between content providers and the carriers that the relationship between the price that a cable/satellite company pays for the right to broadcast any one channel and that channel's net cost to the consumer is a tricky, tricky thing for anyone that doesn't have every single bit of info to figure out.
D) So what does it all mean?
In the end, the biggest issue is the control that the major content providers like Disney, Fox and Time-Warner (who is, of course, also a provider) have over pricing structures. They have that control because they are very, very big and there are not that many of them. That means carriers can't just 'get a different channel' as replacement if they don't (for the most part) allow that pricing structure to remain the way the content providers want it to. So the answer for better consumer pricing is pretty much smaller, more independent, content providers.
As that is the almost complete opposite of the trend in entertainment (sports, movies, TV programming) for companies to become bigger and bigger I wish you all the best of luck with that - I'm going to surf the web on my 5Mbps/1Mbps connection which I pay about $40.00/month (Canadian, no less!, about $29.00 US) for and look at all the great ad/pop-up/spam-paid-for content I want!
--
I keep the wolf from the door || Athlon 2800+|1GB DDR400 RAM|Seagate Barracuda 120GB|Radeon 9600XT 256MB|Viewsonic G22fb 21" | |
| | ParanoiaInc
join:2002-08-28
Tucker, GA
| Re: Not that easy... While this seems to be centrally focused on the cable industry I can tell you they are the only ones looking for this application. First, I want a la carte in the DBS (satellite) industry, too, and they represent +20 million subscribers. Also, their equipment is already digital--now ain't that convenient!?! | |
| | gpancner
join:2001-09-27
Nine Mile Falls, WA
| Finally, an itelligent posting on the issue of ala carte.
One point to add though is the fixed cost of delivering the services to the consumer which does not include the programming.
Also, do you think the local governments who "are looking out for the consumer" would really want to see a decrease in the fees the require cable companies to pass on to the consumer? I think not. And, the governments will support ala carte in public and back door squash the idea. | |
| 
BigCreek
God Is Good.
Premium
join:2002-06-25
Heber Springs, AR | This is a good thing, IF ... This is a good thing, IF ... they will simultaneously get rid of the endless irritating commercials on these channels.
I'll gladly pay for no commercials. | |
| | 
CPM
join:2001-08-24
Miami, FL | Re: This is a good thing, IF ... Of course they fail to provide the math. It is so cheap per Television channel. People would be upset knowing that cable and sat are overpricing people. | |
| | bmn
? ? ?
Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus
 ·Packet8
·Cox HSI
| My memory may be incorrect, but IIRC that's the way it used to be with cable...
Cable was a pay service just like it is now, but it did NOT have commercials. Subscription paid for the content instead of advertising. However, most people didn't want to pay for something they could get for free, even with the short commercial breaks...
Now we have to pay for television WITH commercials. And the total length of commercial breaks per hour has increased since then.
--
Want to annoy conservatives and liberals ? Use facts. | |
| 
DavidD6
join:2000-04-06
Stockton, CA
| In a Parallel Universe.... In another universe, much like our own, cable providers sell television "a la cart" and users pay between $2-5 per channel, per month.
The customers in that universe, who only pay for 5 or 6 channels max, complain that they should just be able to pay a flat $30-50/mo and get ALL the channels they want.
They argue that since it costs the cable company the same amount of money to deliver 1 station as it does 100, they should just have to pay for the pipe and not what comes on it.
Paying for TV a la cart is like paying for Internet service based on how many websites you go to.
I'm all the fan of cheaper TV rates (I refuse to pay $30 for just basic), but I also think that moving to an a la cart model is just as silly as today's overpriced system. You'd have to pay a base rate of $10-15 anyway, so add your one or two preferred stations and you're already talking $20-30/mo. Not much of a savings anyway. Why bother?
Besides, it will all be a moot point as soon as on-demand delivery is a reality, and all TV is streamed over the Internet. Imagine TiVo on steroids. Keep in mind that the only thing stopping this from being reality is regulation, not technology. | |
| | ParanoiaInc
join:2002-08-28
Tucker, GA | Re: In a Parallel Universe.... Can you prove this parallel universe? | |
| | |
DavidD6
join:2000-04-06
Stockton, CA | Re: In a Parallel Universe.... Yes I can, but... The thought of Microsoft running open source and Google being nothing but a number would make your head explode. | |
| Slacker44
join:2001-05-10
Gilbert, AZ | Simple Pretty simple. If no one pays the $6.33, then they will have to lower the price or fold. I'm not paying $6.33 for discovery. | |
| |
marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
| *Bingo* And there you have the crux of the issue.
With their projected subscriber base on a la carte, Discovery needs to charge $6.33/subscriber to bring in enough revenue to produce programming at their current level (this is also assuming that the price will turn off a chunk of potential subscribers). And one important note, this is what Discovery will charge per subscriber to the cable companies, not what the consumer will pay.
If the maximized revenue is still not high enough, then Discovery will have to cut back on programming production. If it turns out that they cannot produce enough quality programming to pull in enough subscribers for their topic, they will fold.
Along with Sci-Fi, Food Network, almost every HD based channel, Game Show, in short most of the channels that are not:
Sports
MTV
Disney
Premium movie
Broadcast
News
Home Shopping (yes, they really do make that much money)
Religious (yes, they really do get that many donations)
Nick might survive, but it's doubtful comedy central or cartoon network would survive. Overlapping specialities will almost certainly contract to 1-2 channels.
Yeah, this sounds like a bunch of doom and gloom, but the easiest way to understand this is that there is a limited amount of advertising revenue and cable subscriber dollars to go around. A la carte offers concentrate a greater percentage of those dollars in the most popular channels. It becomes a given that the viewing public will either have to spend more money or lose the less popular channels to have a la carte services.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://whip.isca.uiowa.edu
Member: American Association of Geographers, American Geophysical Union, American Water Resources Association | |
| | | hskrfan23
join:2004-03-18
West Sacramento, CA
| Re: *Bingo* I think y'all may be underestimating things..these bundles are only as low as they are because of the shopping channels, like QVC, or ShopNBC, etc that pay incredible aomunts to have ther channels run on the networks, and if you break up into a la carte, one of the most expensive channels will be ESPN, which a good majority of people watch anyway. So, added cost for certain channels, and decreased revenue from shopping channels, which would only pay as to who subscribes im sure, leads to suck ass prices for a la carte, which ay be good for a few, nut not for the majority | |
| 
Doctor Dan
Weapons Of Masturbation
Premium
join:2001-10-20
Papiopolis | A Discovery indeed... At $6.33/month, the Discovery Channel would soon discover that their subscriber base has vanished into a black hole.
- Dan
--
"Are you not aware that I get farty and bloated with a foamy latte?" | |
| | 
Voyager2K2
join:2001-10-04
Wayne, PA
| Re: A Discovery indeed... said by Doctor Dan :
At $6.33/month, the Discovery Channel would soon discover that their subscriber base has vanished into a black hole.
- Dan
You got that right.
More entertainment fat cats raping the public.
If market forces set the price maybe the execs might have to make a little less or jack up the commercial prices.
Boo hoo.
Honestly I have gotten so sick of Cable, The RIAA, and The MPAA. They have or are very close to being the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back.
Screw 'em all. Get a dog. Read. Take walks. Be amazed at the diversity of life around you. You don't need The Discovery Channel to show you nature in your armchair. Experience it first-hand. | |
| | ParanoiaInc
join:2002-08-28
Tucker, GA
| I am paying $10.99 for DirecTV's HD Premium Package. This equates to four (4) channels for $10.99. That's essentially $2.75 for that one HD channel.
Now, considering I only want HD channels and nothing else I'd be happy to pay $2.75/channel as it would make a great reduction in my +$70/month bill. | |
| |
|
|
A La Carte
·