If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(C|Net)   John McCain pushes to end cable bundling, says anyone that wants certain channels should just go up on the roof and adjust the antenna like he does   (news.cnet.com) divider line 22
    More: Spiffy, John McCain, senate commerce committee, cable operators, Google's YouTube, product bundling  
•       •       •

1496 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 May 2013 at 11:18 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-05-11 09:27:16 AM
4 votes:
I would love a la carte options.  I have access to probably over 800 channels, including music channels...lets see here...let's see what I do not watch - about 50-100 are various shopping networks (I am not an insomniac or old), probably about a third to half are foreign language channels (I only speak English), probably about 20-30+ are sports related (I do not watch sports)...and a majority of the remaining are other crap that I never turn to.

I only watch about...25 channels on a "regular basis"...and I occasionally flip through the music channels, but even at that, I only hop on about 5-8 of those...I mean, I've got Pandora which already knows what I like to listen to...

I know I am not alone here...
2013-05-11 11:55:48 AM
3 votes:
People, just bite the bullet and cancel your cable/satellite subscriptions. I switched to Roku a few months ago and I havent watched better TV in years. Pirate Bay fills in the gaps. Most stuff on television these days is just garbage and propaganda anyway, and I sure as hell aren't going to pay 80 bucks a month for that.
2013-05-11 10:50:18 AM
3 votes:
Netflix for entertainment, 'net for news (without the professional opinion spewers), and torrent anything I can't find legitimately.
2013-05-11 08:50:55 AM
3 votes:
I, for one, am proud to see the Republicans focusing on jobs. Just like they promised us.
2013-05-11 10:31:05 AM
2 votes:

dletter: Karac: If they offered me a chance to pick and choose the channels I wanted for say ... $1 a month each, I'd probably take them up on a few.

And if that expensive restaurant with really good steaks would only sell them to me for, oh, say, $3.... I'd eat their 3 days a week.


You can pick and choose which night you want to eat their steaks.  They don't lock you into a 2-year contract that charges you whether they serve you up a filet mignon or a tapeworm infestest steak tartar.
2013-05-11 10:14:52 AM
2 votes:

Endive Wombat: I would love a la carte options.  I have access to probably over 800 channels, including music channels...lets see here...let's see what I do not watch - about 50-100 are various shopping networks (I am not an insomniac or old), probably about a third to half are foreign language channels (I only speak English), probably about 20-30+ are sports related (I do not watch sports)...and a majority of the remaining are other crap that I never turn to.

I only watch about...25 channels on a "regular basis"...and I occasionally flip through the music channels, but even at that, I only hop on about 5-8 of those...I mean, I've got Pandora which already knows what I like to listen to...

I know I am not alone here...


Nope. You're not alone.

I just moved into a new place and got set up with cable.  The cheapest TV package was $50.  I told them to go screw themselves and just to the internet connection.

If they offered me a chance to pick and choose the channels I wanted for say ... $1 a month each, I'd probably take them up on a few.
2013-05-11 03:27:04 PM
1 votes:
You have to love the lunacy of the cable business model.  Commercial sponsors pay networks to have tv shows made so as many people as possible will have a reason to watch their commercials, networks charge cable providers money to air their shows, and cable companies charge even more to subscribers for the privilege of watching shows have already been paid for and marked up twice, both middlemen shrinking the audience for the advertisers.
2013-05-11 02:14:12 PM
1 votes:

Zeno-25: People, just bite the bullet and cancel your cable/satellite subscriptions. I switched to Roku a few months ago and I havent watched better TV in years. Pirate Bay fills in the gaps. Most stuff on television these days is just garbage and propaganda anyway, and I sure as hell aren't going to pay 80 bucks a month for that.


I have tried, but Comcast bundles their internet and their basic television package in such a way that if we cancel the TV service, our internet bill will go up to higher than the TV/internet service combined.

\haven't reconnected the cable TV in a few months
2013-05-11 01:29:22 PM
1 votes:

randomjsa: There is no single thing the Republicans could do that would help the economy and job creation than the repeal of ObamaCare. I haven't seen the claim that the Republicans want to 'wreck the economy and blame it on Obama' for awhile but back when liberals insisted on that fairy tale I was amused. Repealing ObamaCare would be a great boon for the economy, and Obama being the worm that he is, would gladly take credit for it.


Ya know what? Next year due to the ACA I will probably be able to get the medical help I need. What's your solution to the health care issue besides "hurrr hurr Obama bad,liberals bad,fark you got mine go die from something easily treatable"?
2013-05-11 01:23:14 PM
1 votes:
Dammit so Much!

I wish McCain had never heard of Sarah "Pull out at the last minute" Palin.

If he can pull this off he will increase his awesome factor X10
2013-05-11 01:18:18 PM
1 votes:

randomjsa: Repealing ObamaCare would be a great boon for the economy


How would drastically altering the health care system yet again as people already start to settle into Obamacare be good for the economy?

Be specific.
2013-05-11 12:29:27 PM
1 votes:
This is actually about Cable companies not wanting to have to buy bundles from the content providers.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-03-19/business/37845665_1_ca bl e-companies-cable-firms-cablevision-and-other-cable
2013-05-11 12:00:23 PM
1 votes:

DubyaHater: Lol.

ITT: Losers who still own TV's


Nothing wrong with TVs. Mine happens to be attached to a raspberry pi with xbmc and a DVD player that does Netflix. Not giving any money to cable or sat but I still watch what I want.

Cheers
2013-05-11 11:59:23 AM
1 votes:

dletter: 2. The thing you are REALLY overpaying for that raises your bill.... equipment.   The fact that 3rd parties can't sell you a compatible box for $50-100 and you have to "rent" a box from the company for anywhere from $5-20/month for a 2nd, 3rd, 4th TV or for DVR/HD level box is what is really killing your bill.  If guys like McCain really want to lower your cable bill, you'd attack that end of the bill.


HWAAA?

You can buy a cable modem at any big box computer store for like $30. Only chumps rent cable modems.

And you can rent cablecards for third-party dvrs (like tivos) or roll-you-own pcs for $1/mo generally if you don't want to use the cable company's dvr.

That $5/per TV charge isn't to pay for equipment (back in the day you had to BUY outright the boxes for directv, for example).

It's simply just a fark-you because-we-can fee.

/would get rid of the tv portion of my fios package, but it's cheaper to keep tv & phone than go internet only
2013-05-11 11:59:05 AM
1 votes:
Cable companies raising their basic "lifeline" fees in 3..... 2....

Seriously, get ready for your overall rate to go up.
2013-05-11 11:54:29 AM
1 votes:
Isn't outlawing a particular business model exactly the kind of meddling with the free market that Republicans are supposed to hate?
2013-05-11 11:48:01 AM
1 votes:

dletter: 1. The "popular" channels (which, yes, obviously include sports and those spanish channels).... and what has been said ad naseum in these threads.... the cable / satellite companies get those channels for (other than ESPN and a handful of more expensive channels) around 40 cents to a dollar per subscriber, because they are bought "in bulk", ie, for all of their 5-10 million (or more) subscribers. If they were only buying for customers on an "ala carte" basis, those channels would charge 5-10x that per subscriber, depending on how many subscribers want a channel. The channels are not going to lose 80% of their revenue going to "ala carte" pricing, they'll make it up by jacking up the per subscriber rate.... which will get passed to the consumer. You'll end up getting only the 8-10 channels "you want" for basically the same price you are paying for


Don't forget these media groups own more than 1 channel.

For example, Disney owns both ESPN and Disney Channel. Comcast pays for both channels in a bundle deal with Disney. Which means that if you want ESPN, you're going to have to pay for Disney Channel whether you want it or not.

They will never allow their channels to be bought one by one because that gets rid of their leverage when they want to negotiate carriage for a new channel.
2013-05-11 11:37:57 AM
1 votes:
Looks like the cable lobby was late in paying its bill.
2013-05-11 11:31:48 AM
1 votes:
Why do Republican keep meddling in the affairs of private business? McCain's bill pretty much turns these cable companies into state run media. If he forces them to control what they sell and how they sell it, how is this not a government take over of the cable companies?
2013-05-11 11:23:00 AM
1 votes:

Karac: Endive Wombat: I would love a la carte options.  I have access to probably over 800 channels, including music channels...lets see here...let's see what I do not watch - about 50-100 are various shopping networks (I am not an insomniac or old), probably about a third to half are foreign language channels (I only speak English), probably about 20-30+ are sports related (I do not watch sports)...and a majority of the remaining are other crap that I never turn to.

I only watch about...25 channels on a "regular basis"...and I occasionally flip through the music channels, but even at that, I only hop on about 5-8 of those...I mean, I've got Pandora which already knows what I like to listen to...

I know I am not alone here...

Nope. You're not alone.

I just moved into a new place and got set up with cable.  The cheapest TV package was $50.  I told them to go screw themselves and just to the internet connection.

If they offered me a chance to pick and choose the channels I wanted for say ... $1 a month each, I'd probably take them up on a few.


The problem is that $1/month is about what they charge the cable companies to get into 110 million homes (most are actually about $.30-$.60/month but some are in that dollar range).  Once you cut their user base back from 110 million to 10-20 million, they're going to have to up their carriage fee 5-10 times to make up for the cost.  So now channels are going to be $3-6/month (up to $20 or $30 for ESPN).  It may not seem like it, but for the vast majority of people, bundling channels will save money.
2013-05-11 10:24:56 AM
1 votes:
I like what McCain is doing here, but I don't see how a la carte is going to necessarily lower your bill.The cable companies costs are not going to change that much. They still need maintenance crews, customer service people, capital expenses, real estate, and all the rest. I mean do you want 20 channels for $60/month or 200 channels for $60/month. Maybe there is a minor cost reduction for ESPN, etc? I just don't see much room for big savings.
2013-05-11 10:16:36 AM
1 votes:

Endive Wombat: I would love a la carte options.  I have access to probably over 800 channels, including music channels...lets see here...let's see what I do not watch - about 50-100 are various shopping networks (I am not an insomniac or old), probably about a third to half are foreign language channels (I only speak English), probably about 20-30+ are sports related (I do not watch sports)...and a majority of the remaining are other crap that I never turn to.

I only watch about...25 channels on a "regular basis"...and I occasionally flip through the music channels, but even at that, I only hop on about 5-8 of those...I mean, I've got Pandora which already knows what I like to listen to...

I know I am not alone here...


OMG.... you think you are actually PAYING for those shopping and religious channels?   No, those are just thrown on their for free basically.... the shopping channels don't need to be paid because they make their money on people actually buying stuff, and the religious channels don't get enough viewership to force an operator a fee.

Two things you are paying for.....

1. The "popular" channels (which, yes, obviously include sports and those spanish channels).... and what has been said ad naseum in these threads.... the cable / satellite companies get those channels for (other than ESPN and a handful of more expensive channels) around 40 cents to a dollar per subscriber, because they are bought "in bulk", ie, for all of their 5-10 million (or more) subscribers.   If they were only buying for customers on an "ala carte" basis, those channels would charge 5-10x that per subscriber, depending on how many subscribers want a channel.  The channels are not going to lose 80% of their revenue going to "ala carte" pricing, they'll make it up by jacking up the per subscriber rate.... which will get passed to the consumer.   You'll end up getting only the 8-10 channels "you want" for basically the same price you are paying for

2. The thing you are REALLY overpaying for that raises your bill.... equipment.   The fact that 3rd parties can't sell you a compatible box for $50-100 and you have to "rent" a box from the company for anywhere from $5-20/month for a 2nd, 3rd, 4th TV or for DVR/HD level box is what is really killing your bill.  If guys like McCain really want to lower your cable bill, you'd attack that end of the bill.
 
Displayed 22 of 22 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report