When or is this ever going to happen? Is cable and DirecTV going anywhere soon?

When or is this ever going to happen? Is cable and DirecTV going anywhere soon?

 

Had this discussion with a friend last night.

 

I think the issue would be is most peoples bill would be cut in half and that is bad for business.

 

It is going to take a company doing it on the Net where everything is a la carte but at the same time reasonably priced in piecemeal.

When or is this ever going to happen? Is cable and DirecTV going anywhere soon?

 

That's essentially what you get when you buy a streaming device like Apple TV or Roku. The only difference there is that you don't have a DVR option.

If that ever becomes an option, they'll just jack the prices up on the individual channels so much that it will be cheaper to buy packages like we already have...

That's essentially what you get when you buy a streaming device like Apple TV or Roku. The only difference there is that you don't have a DVR option.

 

Not quite. You still have to have a cable or satellite provider account to access many of the channels (ABC, ESPN, etc).

 

As for the original post, it would be nice to be able to purchase individual channels, but I don't see it every happening. ABC will up-charge people to support all their channels. Scripps will do the same thing. In the end, the cost for $10 channels would probably equal a package deal for 120 channels that we're currently paying.

If that ever becomes an option, they'll just jack the prices up on the individual channels so much that it will be cheaper to buy packages like we already have...

 

That is what would happen and would out of necessity. Far more of the money you pay to cable companies goes towards infrastructure than it does what they pay to ESPN, Fox, Disney, History Channel, etc..

 

From 2000 to 2003 I worked at Insight Communitcations and when I saw monthly financials, it amazed me the small amounts paid to programmers compared to the huge amount paid for bond issues to pay for plants, distribution equipment, and their upgrades.

 

I am not sure how it works for the dish companies. I guess for them the big cost is buying or leasing satellites????

Cable and Satellite providers would love to have this option. The reason why? Many times they're being forced to take on extra channels that a particular producer supplies, even if they don't want it, just to be able to get the ones they do want....just like you and I. With the exception of the ESPN's, most people think each channel is from a different company. But, they're not. Fox and Discovery both have at least a half dozen or more channels, and there are more just like them. And with that, comes leverage. If you want "popular channel A", then you have to not only take "unpopular channel B", but you also have to put it in the same package as "A". Instead of worrying about putting on great programming that is attractive to a wide audience, (and subsequently be able to bill higher advertising dollars due to all the viewers), they get their money up front from the cable/satellite companies by charging per subscriber (whether they watch the dang channel or not). Which ultimately gets passed along to the public.

 

Bottom line is, I wouldn't hold my breath. I just don't see it happening real soon. The internet is going to have to become a MAJOR player in the providing of original material, before the current philosophy is done away with.

Has HBO announced when they will charge for their service only? That will be an online sevice, right? I know lots of people get HBO free by using a friends password for HBO GO, surprised they haven't caught on to that one yet

Cable and Satellite providers would love to have this option. The reason why? Many times they're being forced to take on extra channels that a particular producer supplies, even if they don't want it, just to be able to get the ones they do want....just like you and I. With the exception of the ESPN's, most people think each channel is from a different company. But, they're not. Fox and Discovery both have at least a half dozen or more channels, and there are more just like them. And with that, comes leverage. If you want "popular channel A", then you have to not only take "unpopular channel B", but you also have to put it in the same package as "A". Instead of worrying about putting on great programming that is attractive to a wide audience, (and subsequently be able to bill higher advertising dollars due to all the viewers), they get their money up front from the cable/satellite companies by charging per subscriber (whether they watch the dang channel or not). Which ultimately gets passed along to the public.

 

Bottom line is, I wouldn't hold my breath. I just don't see it happening real soon. The internet is going to have to become a MAJOR player in the providing of original material, before the current philosophy is done away with.

 

This, a thousand times.

 

Good, bad or indifferent, part of the media deregulation bill that Clinton and the GOP congress rammed through back in (I think) '98 opened the door to this being more extreme than what the average consumer would like.

 

Say you're a big fan of Comedy Central. Well, to get Comedy Central, your cable/dish provider also has to put CMT, Spike, BET and MTV with it in the same tier since they're all owned by Viacom.

 

Same reason why if you like TBS, well, you're gonna get TRU as well, even though nobody watches that channel except for four days in March.

I just need a handful of channels.......History, H2, National Geographic, SyFy, Discovery, Investigation Discovery, American Heroes, TLC, probably a couple I'm forgetting. Can't remember the last time I turned on ESPN....maybe during College Softball World Series.

This, a thousand times.

 

Good, bad or indifferent, part of the media deregulation bill that Clinton and the GOP congress rammed through back in (I think) '98 opened the door to this being more extreme than what the average consumer would like.

 

Say you're a big fan of Comedy Central. Well, to get Comedy Central, your cable/dish provider also has to put CMT, Spike, BET and MTV with it in the same tier since they're all owned by Viacom.

 

Same reason why if you like TBS, well, you're gonna get TRU as well, even though nobody watches that channel except for four days in March.

 

All good points.

 

Deregulation of cable was a huge mistake. Huge mistake.

 

As to the orginal post in the thread. None of these businesses are going to start giving money back, so unless technology changes, not much change.

 

Several have mentioned internet options, for that you need an ISP. For most it's the cable company.

 

If someone becomes a strong ISP provider, they will charge a premium for ISP and we will be back to square one.

Has HBO announced when they will charge for their service only? That will be an online sevice, right? I know lots of people get HBO free by using a friends password for HBO GO, surprised they haven't caught on to that one yet

 

ttt

Sling TV: A Giant Step From Cable - WSJ

 

 

Television is finally escaping the clutches of cable.

 

The latest cable monopoly to fall is live TV. An Internet service launching Tuesday called Sling TV streams a dozen of the most popular networks, including ESPN, CNN, TBS and Disney Channel,—for a flat $20 a month. Using an early version, I’ve been watching TV on my tablet, phone and even on a big screen.