My Prediction:  Even if the FCC or Congress mandated a "third tier"
like so:
- Limited= ~$12 a month
- Basic  = ~$45 a month
- Limited + A La Carte = $12 a month +  $1/cable channel*

What will probably happen is that "inertia" will set in, and ~99% of
Americans will keep what they already have: BASIC CABLE.     Most
Americans will NOT switch to a la carte, and therefore nothing would
change for ~99% of consumers.  No changes in lineup & no changes in
price.



HOWEVER, there would be new revenue generated from Non-Cable
subscribers (raises hand) who would decide to "join up" for the new A
La Carte service.  Figure an extra 15-20 dollars per new subscriber ==
Several million dollars in additional revenue (nationwide).

So to summarize:
- ~99% of Americans would stay with BASIC cable
- Therefore virtually no loss of revenue from current subscribers
-
- NEW non-cable subscribers would be attracted to the ala carte
- Thereby generating more revenue.
- And the bottom line: An INCREASE in profits for the cable company

The advent of A La Carte would be somewhat similar to what happened to
NBC.com, FOX.com, et cetera when they added free episodes of their
programming.  Instead of losing audience (as many feared), the
Internet Episodes generated MORE interest in the networks and Growth
in their revenue.  A La Carte would be a *positive* for the cable
industry, not a negative.



* (Subscriber fees for channels like USA, TNT are ~50 cents.  CNN,
FOXnews are ~25 cents per subscriber.  The cable company would likely
double that wholesale price to the consumer, and that's how I arrived
at $1/channel retail.)

Left out of this whole discussion is the basic fact that the cable
rates keep skyrocketing for one reason and one reason only -- the cost
of sports programming.  Track salaries for major league football and
baseball and basketball and you'll find they correlate closely with
the exponential increase of cable TV bills.

It's very unlikely that we'll see a la carte programming because at
least half the population would dump sports programming, which would
mean a gigantic increase in cost for the other half who want to
susbscribe. Studies show that 50% of the population  just doesn't care
about sports. I certainly don't. If I ever got a la carte programming,
it would be basic programming + Sci Fi Channel + Discovery Channel and
that's that. Nothing else.

As Josh hadley has pointed out, most cable network channels have lost
their soul. TNT used to run cool old sci fi movies you couldn't find
anywhere on "100% Weird" friday nights. TNT also used to run tons of
great old TV movies. Now, TNT runs pretty much nothing but Law &
Order, so it's toast. I never watch it. TNT has turned to crap. Ditto
TBS. Time was, TBS ran great old shows like Cimarron Strip and classic
TV movies like Genesis II. Now, TBS runs nothing but syndicated 90s TV
show junk -- shows you can get on DVD, for the most part. Worthless.
TBS has turned to crap.

Even the Sci Fi Channel used to run lots of great old movies and
series. Remember 1997? When the Sci Fi Channel ran Science Fiction
Theater (1953) and The Invisible Man (British, 1958) and Men Into
Space (1959)?  How about 1996, when the Sci Fi Channel ran Time Trax
_and_ Robocop: The Series _and_ The Flash?  What does the Sci Fi
Channel run now?  Xena and Hercules, both of which you can get on DVD.

A la carte is too little too late. The cable superstations turned to
crap a long time ago. Today, there's only HBO and the Sleuth channel
and FLIX and on rare occasions Turner Classic Movies (once in a while
they toss up some wild-ass ancient cool movie, like Hand Of Death
91962) last year).  Movieplex used to run a lot of cool weird stuff
and once upon a time, about 10 years, Cinemax ran insanely cool films
and TV movies you couldn't find anywhere. But today Cinemax has turned
into a dumping ground for Miramax films (which anyone can get at the
local DVD store) and Movieplex stopped running neat stuff like that
big string of Name Of the Game they ran back in 1995.

Today, the BBC has a lot better stuff than any of the American
superstations. Fortunately, there's always bittorrent. And guess
what?  That's free.

That's probably true, but you've got the cause and effect backwards.
Cable rates keep skyrocketing because people are willing to pay the
higher rates.  Pro athletes make big money because there are plenty of
people shelling out money to watch them play, not the other way around.

On Mar 1, 3:57 am, sea***@altavista.com wrote:
That will change when the "bubble" bursts & people start defaulting on
their ~$20,000 credit card debts.  They won't have cable tv, because
they won't be able to afford to buy it.  (Yes I'm a pessimist about
the economic future.... the debt keeps piling up.  Something has to
give.)



Also I keep repeating this, but only because some of you missed it the
first time:

I predict ~99% of Americans would STAY with Basic.  That means no
changes in lineup & no loss of revenue for TNT, CNN, etcetera.  That
means a la carte would have no negative impact on profits.

Show quote Hide quote All I know is that nothing has gotten any better in recent years. The
more channels added the more repeats. We don't need 6 versions of HBO
or Discovery or whatever. We need less channels with more variety. The
viewer pie is sliced too thin to make good programming on all these
channels. So let A La Carte prune the TV tree and let the channels
fall where they may.

Jim

Excellent message.  Worth repeating:

Jim wrote:
Of course what would ACTUALLY happen, since Americans tend to be
inert, is that ~99% of them would stay with the 60-70 channel Basic
service.  That's true with Cellular service.

There are many plans that cost only 10 or 20 dollars, but due to
"inertia" 99% of Americans continue using the expensive 30 or 40
dollar plans.  They don't bother to switch to cheaper plans, because
it's too much effort.

The same would be true with Basic Cable.  ~99% of americans would not
switch from what they have now.

On 28 Feb 2007 06:05:54 -0800, "SFTVratings"
<SFTVratings_t***@yahoo.com> wrote:

<snip>

No matter how you slice it,  the fact remains:

If it were economically preferable to offer a la carte service,  they
would be offering it.

The fact that they fight this tooth and nail ought to tell you
something.

I actually had a la carte service once upon a time.
"Basic"  cost about $12.00 a month,  and I added Comedy central for
$1.00 a month, and HBO for about $8.00 a month.
It was pretty sweet.
It was only offered in the first place because they were FORCED to do
so.  But then they paid off enough corrupt politicians who then
allowed them to phase this service out.  For a while there,  it was
kind of murky as to what they were legally obliged to offer.
They figured out that while they were obliged to offer a la carte,
they were not legally obliged to promote it.  So guess what ? They
didn't.
Bottom line: They HATE a la carte.
You're never going to pursuade them to offer it with economic
arguements. Never.  They have their own research (and believe me, it's
far more accurate than yours),  and they know beyond a shadow of doubt
that they do not want to offer it. Their every move proves this.
The ONLY way we'll ever see a la carte again is if they are FORCED to
offer it.  You're kidding yourself if you think that they will EVER do
this voluntarily.
The choice is yours. You can vote for politicians who tend to favor
consumers, or you can vote for politicians who tend to favor corporate
interests.
It should be pretty easy to figure out which ones are going to do what
you want.

--TBR

On Mar 3, 8:59 am, The Boston Rag <TheBoston***@fakeaddy.com> wrote:
What Cable Company is that which offers a la carte?

Capture HD video directly from HDMI uncompressed
FINAL CUT PRO HELP!!! ANNOYING PULSE/BEEP IN PLAYBACK!
Is firewire to usb cable ok for connecting DV videocamera (firewire) to my PC (usb) ?
Q: Is Digital over-the-air reception worse than Analog?
Transfer 8mm movies to miniDV, then record to television DVD Recorder