It's 2012, how come we still don't have any kind of a la carte services?

[CTech83]

We got a la carte services already, it's called the web breh. 95% of the shyt they have on TV we can get off the web. I've got basic cable for convenience at this point. I can't wait to cut this shyt

 

[jwinfield]

What about that appetizers suggestion I had?

Put a couple of those smaller channels in a subsection and force people to pick a couple (say 5 or 6). Would be better than being forced to have all of them, no?

Why would any one on the other side do that though?

 

[MR. SNIFLES]

and it leads to the situation we're in now where you're paying for a bunch of stuff you don't use. it's like a system where if you want to hear the Nas album, you have to buy a 'set' that includes every Def Jam release from that year

I THINK YOU'RE MISSING THE POINT. YOU'RE PAYING FOR STUFF YOU DON'T USE BUT YOU WILL END UP PAYING MORE FOR LESS OTHERWISE. YOU WON'T SAVE MONEY GOING DIRECTLY TO THE COMPANY.

THE CABLE COMPANIES FUNCTION ALMOST LIKE A UNION. THEY NEGOTIATE FOR LOWER PRICES AND USE US AS A BARGAINING TOOL. IF WE ALL WENT AT HBO INDIVIDUALLY WE WOULD GET NOTHING DONE AND END UP GETTING RAPED.

I'D RATHER PAY 10 DOLLARS FOR 10 HBO CHANNELS BEFORE PAYING RATHER THAN PAYING 8 DOLLARS FOR 1 EVEN IF 6 OF THEM ARE GARBAGE.

THE ONLY PROBLEM I HAVE WITH CABLE COMPANIES IS HOW THEY DIVIDE UP THE PACKAGES. YOU HAVE TO BUY 3 OR 4 PACKAGES TO GET THE CHANNELS YOU DO WANT.

THEY SHOULD PUT CHANNELS INTO TIERS. THEN LET YOU PICK A CERTAIN NUMBER OF CHANNELS FROM EACH TIER WITH EACH PACKAGE YOU BUY.

 

[daze23]

I THINK YOU'RE MISSING THE POINT. YOU'RE PAYING FOR STUFF YOU DON'T USE BUT YOU WILL END UP PAYING MORE FOR LESS OTHERWISE. YOU WON'T SAVE MONEY GOING DIRECTLY TO THE COMPANY.

THE CABLE COMPANIES FUNCTION ALMOST LIKE A UNION. THEY NEGOTIATE FOR LOWER PRICES AND USE US AS A BARGAINING TOOL. IF WE ALL WENT AT HBO INDIVIDUALLY WE WOULD GET NOTHING DONE AND END UP GETTING RAPED.

there's just no inherent reason it has to be that way

the most obvious thing, that I think no one has brought up, is the physical wire, and the systems and maintenance that go along with that. sure you could go to HBO on your own, but how are you gonna get the signal? that is why all this would be hard to change. the whole infrastructure is built around the current system

 

[the cool]

its 2012 and i still dont' have a HD television. reppin that sony vega CRT tv. free analog cable ftw!!!

 

[Liquid]

It will happen, android will hopefully lead us to the promised land.

As far as those who think they will rape us...won't happen. People do have limits, nobody is going to pay a crazy premium for these channels on their own. They will have to go the mlb.tv, nba league pass route. $100-$150 per year and everyone wins. Those thinking HBO is just going to come in and charge $30-$40 per month is not thinking straight. $15 per month MAX its what they might be able to get away with.

 

[Wildin]

It will happen, android will hopefully lead us to the promised land.

As far as those who think they will rape us...won't happen. People do have limits, nobody is going to pay a crazy premium for these channels on their own. They will have to go the mlb.tv, nba league pass route. $100-$150 per year and everyone wins. Those thinking HBO is just going to come in and charge $30-$40 per month is not thinking straight. $15 per month MAX its what they might be able to get away with.

I don't know if I stated this but I used to work for a cable company. That's where I still get all my info from. Packages work to your benefit, and most packages are derived by the same parent company/broadcasters. If you only knew how much HBO wants to charge vs what your company is asking you to pay, you'd shyt your pants.

There is Epix (a channel I like) which for that 1 channel they want about 17-20 per month...i have a movie pack that gives me that plus a shyt ton of encores, Sundance, independent film channel for like 10. Granted I love Epix, I get more for less thanks to the cable company. Deals aren't always that sweet but that's why companies bond together through tough times like dish and cox just did about that viacom shyt. Cox wasn't in danger of losing the channels but they backed up dish stating the networks are getting greedy.

 

[RicanFury]

it would never ever work. If u cut out the middle man (cox, cablevision, time warner, comcast, etc) the networks would rape you so fierce and get away it that you'd kill yourself.

the cable companies are distributors. ABC own disney and espn, viacom owns all those networks. discovery has like 6 or 7 channels, plus HBO has a bunch. fukk I dont watch HBO Latino but HBO dont give a fukk they say take them all or have nothing.

ESPN charges a particular cable company approx 8 million a month. 96 million a year. Each year they usually acquire something new like olympic coverage, masters, us open tennis, wimbledon or some shyt then the next year they say well we just acquired *this so we are worth x and now we want 10 million...Cable companies usually say fukk that, thus black outs and the little messages on the screen and the commercials that say call your provider to keep amc, viacom channels, espn etc.

If the companies happily agree each year they get fukked. and you as the customer pay more for channels. The cable companies negotiate and say ok HBO we will pay you 10 million month even, have full access to hbo on demand and hbo go then sell all 8 channels plus hd to customer for $15 a month....they agree. Now your paying $15 for all instead of 10 for 2 or so.

If you went straight to hbo or espn, youd pay like $80 for espn 1 and thats it. or $40 for hbo east and thats it.

I worked in a call center for a cable company for a couple years (got phone, internet and cable free) and now my boy works for them, I can get anyone whos interested some industry links that talks about network profits and such if you like numbers.

can you get a nikka a job?

 

[CrimsonTider]

This only sounds good in theory.

 

[Tommy Fits]

It'll happen one day but as long as the baby boomers are the majority generation it won't. Most boomers aren't computer savvy and couldn't tell you what a service like netflix is. More and more of our generation is dropping cable all together, when the boomers start dropping off and the number of subscribers among our generation starts to drop off, then the cable companies will start offering al a carte service to retain customers.

 

[Poppa_Dock]

It will happen, android will hopefully lead us to the promised land.

As far as those who think they will rape us...won't happen. People do have limits, nobody is going to pay a crazy premium for these channels on their own. They will have to go the mlb.tv, nba league pass route. $100-$150 per year and everyone wins. Those thinking HBO is just going to come in and charge $30-$40 per month is not thinking straight. $15 per month MAX its what they might be able to get away with.

this is why i don't get that statement its already cheaper to go directly to the source.

its cheaper to do that with pretty much every service and product on the planet

 

[beenz]

How do you expect smaller channels(that you might like0 to make money and survive?

It's obvious channels like ESPN, CNN, etc have tons of viewers but other channels like Spike or TRU might not have their viewership and they benefit from being under the cable umbrella.

Lets be real here. If no one is watching the shytty channels, why do we have to be forced to subsidize them cuz they are in your cable package? I'd happily take about 30 HD channels I watch over all that other bullshyt if it were cheaper. Hell, paying $50 a month for the 30 channels u actually want is a better deal than paying $100+ for 300 channels and u don't want most of those.

 

[NatiboyB]

Lets be real here. If no one is watching the shytty channels, why do we have to be forced to subsidize them cuz they are in your cable package? I'd happily take about 30 HD channels I watch over all that other bullshyt if it were cheaper. Hell, paying $50 a month for the 30 channels u actually want is a better deal than paying $100+ for 300 channels and u don't want most of those.

exactly. I only look at 15-20 channels and hell 4-5 of them are basic tv.

 

[R.E.N. Spells Ren]

Lets be real here. If no one is watching the shytty channels, why do we have to be forced to subsidize them cuz they are in your cable package? I'd happily take about 30 HD channels I watch over all that other bullshyt if it were cheaper. Hell, paying $50 a month for the 30 channels u actually want is a better deal than paying $100+ for 300 channels and u don't want most of those.

Current cable/satellite companies would never agree to this. It's has to do with big companies not wanting that much volatility in their revenue streams. Same reason why sport teams and concert promoters have very limited variation in their ticketing. Ticket prices tend to only vary by location in the venue. Ticket resellers come through and try to sell tickets more closely to their true market value. People whine about resellers driving up the cost of tickets above that arbitrary "face vale" but they don't realize that if the owners/promoters felt comfortable charging more, then they would. It's just they have big bills to worry about in terms of putting on the event so they can't get that cute with the ticketing. Once the airline industry figured out how to get cute with ticket prices, they did, too.

The internet is your only hope for a la carte services. Networks will tread lightly here, cuz they wouldn't want to piss off their biggest revenue generators (cable/satellite companies).