A La Carte = 15 channels of local television for ~$12 a month + choose
your own channels (TNT, FX, et cetera) for approximately $1 each.



If that service was offered, would you:

(a) I have Basic now, but I would downgrade to A La Carte.
(b) I have Limited Service.  I would upgrade to A La Carte.
(c) I have No Cable TV.  But I would sign-up for A La Carte if
offered.

(d) I'd stay with my current service.  No change.

Show quoteHide quote

In rec.arts.tv on 28 Feb 2007 10:34:52 -0800 in Msg.#
<1172687691.874738.264***@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "SFTVratings"
<SFTVratings_t***@yahoo.com>  wrote:

It doesn't address the 'cable' channels that may only be available via
Digital according to Cable outlet.

Basic cable is 65 channels for $15 a month.

As long as we are making up the price structure for ala carte, we should be
free to make up a future price structure for basic cable, too, right?

Obveeus wrote:
Go to your prayer closet & ask for forgiveness (lying).  Basic does
NOT cost $15 in any company, anywhere.

;-)

Since you are able to dictate what prices the cable co's will charge why
not wish for a la carte at a penny a channel?

karl wrote:

It appears that nobody understands the relationship between program
provider/cable company/cable subscriber.

Currently, the program providers charge the cable companies a per
subscriber fee based upon the fact that an entire tier of subscribers
are getting the program. It could be as low as pennies per subscriber
if the distribution is large enough.

In an ala carte system, they would require the same income but with
many fewer subscribers. Thus, they would charge the cable company more
per subscriber, and of course the cable company would pass the increase
on to the subscriber. They will no longer get income from those that
don't watch the service, so those that *do* want to watch will pay more.

It wouldn't be unusual to only get HALF the channels as before
(depending on how many you want), but still pay close to the
same amount as you used to. Price per channel WILL be higher.

Many will want the option of still getting a channel that they
watched only once or twice in the last year simply so they won't
miss out on a program that might appear there. They will pay dearly
for that option.

Methinks that after doing the math many (most) will stick to the
current tier system - not because of laziness, but because of
economics. Of course the cable companies will seize this opportunity
to raise their tier rates.

Read a book instead.

Morph wrote:
Bzzzzz.  ~99% of Americans would continue subscribing to Basic
Service.  That means no change in lineup & no loss in profits.

Just as when Internet Episodes were added to nbc.com, fox.com,
etcetera, there was NO loss in profits.  People said there would be,
but those people were wrong.

You're just afraid of change.
THINK using your brain, not fear.

karl wrote:
STRAWMAN ARGUMENT.   I didn't dictate.  I said "approximately".
(Based upon the fact cable channels charge the local company 25-50
cents per subscriber.)

SFTVratings wrote:
At those prices, I would definitely stay with Basic cable.  In my area,
Basic analog cable gives me 70 channels for maybe $20.  That beats your
A La Carte, because I would have to pay $1 each for C-SPAN, C-SPAN2,
CNN, CNN Headline News, Fox News and MSNBC.  So right there, even before
I get to entertainment channels, I'm already paying $18 for only 21
channels.

I'd choose (b)


SFTVratings wrote:>
Show quoteHide quote

Show quote Hide quote Why do you insist on bringing up this a la carte thing again and again ?

In article <Xns98E682A0FA8D0thisnthatadelphianet@216.196.97.142>,
DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> wrote:

Show quoteHide quoteDanS, allow me to introduce you to Troy Heagy, performance troll and the
self styled "most annoying man on usenet"

Troy posts under at least half a dozen names (see below) and his game is
to create a thread that might otherwise be interesting, and introduce a
deliberate mistake into it, and watch it fall apart with people arguing
about his mistake instead the actual topic.

He's been busted in rec.arts.tv so many times that he's expanding his
net to other groups, like mostly sci-fi like Farscape, and now
rec.video.cable-tv etc.  But he sets the cross posts to rec.arts.tv to
show that he's still managing to annoy us here.

He'll now scream that we're haters, and are stalking him, etc., etc.,
etc., and probably threaten legal action, yadda yadda yadda. 

Oh, and he sends death threats to people that expose him like this, and
then will claim they've been sending HIM death threats, and writing his
boss and trying to get him fired, blah blah blah.

Killfile Troy Heagy in all (s)he-its many incarnations now:
Troy.He***@gmail.com,videonov***@yahoo.com
videonovels2***@yahoo.com,telenov***@yahoo.com,fred_h_had***@yahoo.com
**DON'T FORGET THE NEWEST ONE>>> SFTVratings_t***@yahoo.com

Anim8rFSK <ANIM8R***@cox.net> wrote in news:ANIM8Rfsk-1C45DD.11443401032007
@news.phx.highwinds-media.com:

Show quoteHide quoteHmmmm. Didn't seem to be a troll as I would normally spot a troll, and
certainly not THE most annoying....maybe ONE of the most, but not THE most.

I could name a few that I would consider some of the most annoying, but
then again, some of these troll freaks search UseNet daily for any posts
with their named mentioned, or even searching for post about a certain
subject.............

Speaking of which, is there a newsgroup that ID's UseNet kooks ?

When you think about it, the idea of *A LA CARTE* television is nothing more
than an *OXYMORON* Even if you had more than a thousand TV channels to pick
from, either your cable or satellite provider would determine just which
channels belonged in which groups not you. Now it was in multiples of say
"20" just what channels would you pick ? Your service provider no doubt
would have all the movie channels in one group, likewise the sports channels
in another group, again all the news channels in yet another group and so on
and so forth.


"There are no enemies in science just anomalies"

The FCC, being in charge of the cable company monopoly, would forbid
such bundling practice under the "A La Carte" banner.  Cable companies
could still over "Basic" 70-channel bundles, or 200-channel "Digital"
bundles, but the FCC would require the ability to only order *1*
channel at a time, for A La Carte users.

This is not rocket science.

It is easy to control the Cable companies to bend to your will, if you
are the FCC/Government.  That's why 15-channel "Limited" service and
"Must Carry" rules exist. The government dictates to the cable
companies what they MUST offer to customers.  A La Carte would work
the same way.

Also, in addition to the comment above, which seems accurate and
insightful, most folks would probably choose (c) NONE OF THE ABOVE.
They'd download whatever programs they wanted to see a la carte
for zero dollars per month.

It's real hard to compete with a cost of zero dollars per month.

metachromatic wrote:
SFTV wrote:
Thanks!


That's pretty much what I do now.  I like the TV show Galactica on Sci-
fi, but I'm certainly NOT going to pay an extra ~$40 a month just to
see it!  That would be foolish.

I'll download the show off the net, and later purchase the DVD.
In affect, Internet-based a la carte to get the Sci-Fi Channel's
original programs.

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) ?
Transfer 8mm movies to miniDV, then record to television DVD Recorder
Camera To Antenna Input?