Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(Ars Technica)   Cable prices have increased at four times the rate of inflation. Companies tell customers that they can bundle their payments   (arstechnica.com ) divider line
    More: Asinine, coaxial cable, Verizon FiOS, vlog  
•       •       •

933 clicks; posted to Business » on 20 May 2014 at 5:10 PM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



53 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2014-05-20 01:13:24 PM  
Well of course they have to raise rates. They have fewer subscribers every quarter.
 
2014-05-20 01:43:21 PM  
I think they should all merge, this should help reduce costs which, in turn, trickle down to the consumer.

/Hoping Google "Molly" is a set-top box, looking to cut the cord.
 
2014-05-20 05:18:07 PM  

Sybarite: Well of course they have to raise rates. They have fewer subscribers every quarter.


VPN services are growing like crazy.  Funny how that works
 
2014-05-20 05:21:53 PM  
This doesn't control for increased product offerings. You are paying a lot more that you were 18 years ago, but you are getting a lot more programming too.

Someone has to pay for that, as well as for all the sports programming that pays $20m salaries.

Not saying that's good, but it's not like the cable companies are pocketing all of that difference- their costs are going up too.
 
2014-05-20 05:22:40 PM  
Until they offer a-la-carte programming I'll stick with the antenna and FTA dish. And free Hulu. And other methods.
 
2014-05-20 05:27:00 PM  
The funny part is how the "noncompetitive" markets only went up by about 4.5%, while the "competitive" ones went up by about twice that for basic service. And satellite TV went up by the most.
 
2014-05-20 05:27:41 PM  

kittyhas1000legs: Until they offer a-la-carte programming I'll stick with the antenna and FTA dish. And free Hulu. And other methods.


We significantly scaled down. Bundled Xfinity ($20 a month for 2 HD boxes that include locals, TBS and Ondemand which is a nice way of not needing a DVR), Roku for netflix and hulu plus and amazon.

All in all we are saving ~$100 a month and still have more than we can possibly watch. I miss some niche shows but many of them can be watched with an HDMI cable hooked up to a laptop.
 
2014-05-20 05:29:25 PM  
Oh, and here is my tip for cancelling any service. Most of them make you call so they can talk you out of it.

I told them "I have joined a new religion and television is forbidden, we have donated our TVs to charity."

There is nothing in their script for that.
 
2014-05-20 05:38:18 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: This doesn't control for increased product offerings. You are paying a lot more that you were 18 years ago, but you are getting a lot more programming too.

Someone has to pay for that, as well as for all the sports programming that pays $20m salaries.

Not saying that's good, but it's not like the cable companies are pocketing all of that difference- their costs are going up too.


People tend to forget that. Every time there's a spat with a local TV channel about rebroadcast rights or with other channels for their own costs, that means their costs for programming are going up. Only a fool would think they're going to eat that cost- it will get passed along. So when your local TV channel starts biatching about DirecTV or anybody else not paying them enough, they mean they want you to pay more for what you could just as easily watch OTA.

Sure, costs are rising and these providers don't seem to feel a need to hold them down. Hell, they love money too. But there's more than one villain at work, and really, nobody NEEDS pay TV services.
 
2014-05-20 05:48:10 PM  
Good luck, cable companies.  I'm not a cord cutter.  I'm a cord NEVER.  I either stream for free (legitimately) or netflix them, or borrow them from the library.   The scary thing is, most people of my generation are just. like. me.
 
2014-05-20 05:48:44 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: This doesn't control for increased product offerings.


The product offerings have increased a little bit but not a lot at the basic or basic expanded level.  I'm at basic expanded and not getting any of the newest TV channels like FXX and Science Channel and NFL and Esquire and Disney XD and BBC America and Cooking and NBC Sports and CBS Sports and ESPNU and UHD and AXSTV and DIY and Destination and Lifetime Movie and and Biography and Golf and Tennis and Outdoor and Velocity and Big 10 and those are just the ones available in HD if I paid more and don't include the premium movie channels.  In SD, I don't get any of the MTV subchannels or beinsports or fox soccer plus or H2 or Bloomberg or anything spanish besides main Univision or Nick Jr or Boomerang or Logo or Game Show just to name a few.

New channels I've gotten since Disney went to basic expanded I think are just TVG, Palladia, FOX Business, National Geographic, and the local network's HD subchannel stuff.
 
2014-05-20 05:51:45 PM  
Netflix + Prime + series cravings = happy family.

Now, if Google ever showed up in the area I might reconsider, though I'll probably just stick with the internet
 
2014-05-20 05:51:52 PM  

Lexx: Good luck, cable companies.  I'm not a cord cutter.  I'm a cord NEVER.  I either stream for free (legitimately) or netflix them, or borrow them from the library.   The scary thing is, most people of my generation are just. like. me.


Not really if you're not pirating
 
2014-05-20 06:05:34 PM  

Lexx: Good luck, cable companies.  I'm not a cord cutter.  I'm a cord NEVER.  I either stream for free (legitimately) or netflix them, or borrow them from the library.   The scary thing is, most people of my generation are just. like. me.


"Our biggest problem isnt cord cutters, its the younger people who never start up cable." A complaint something along those lines I dont feel like looking specifics up. But yeah, shows the entitlement of the companies at the sheer audacity of customers refusing to buy their shiatty product. Never cable, never over a table.
 
2014-05-20 06:21:21 PM  

Lexx: Good luck, cable companies.  I'm not a cord cutter.  I'm a cord NEVER.  I either stream for free (legitimately) or netflix them, or borrow them from the library.   The scary thing is, most people of my generation are just. like. me.


The cable company that you buy internet access from?
 
2014-05-20 06:25:38 PM  

jigger: Lexx: Good luck, cable companies.  I'm not a cord cutter.  I'm a cord NEVER.  I either stream for free (legitimately) or netflix them, or borrow them from the library.   The scary thing is, most people of my generation are just. like. me.

The cable company that you buy internet access from?


who else will you get internet from? You either dance with the devil or use your iphone at home too instead of just everywhere else.
 
2014-05-20 06:42:54 PM  

Jaws_Victim: jigger: Lexx: Good luck, cable companies.  I'm not a cord cutter.  I'm a cord NEVER.  I either stream for free (legitimately) or netflix them, or borrow them from the library.   The scary thing is, most people of my generation are just. like. me.

The cable company that you buy internet access from?

who else will you get internet from? You either dance with the devil or use your iphone at home too instead of just everywhere else.


Some places still have mom-and-pops who use the DSL common carrier rules to deliver broadband.  Here is mine:

http://www.sonic.net/
 
2014-05-20 07:03:41 PM  

haemaker: Jaws_Victim: jigger: Lexx: Good luck, cable companies.  I'm not a cord cutter.  I'm a cord NEVER.  I either stream for free (legitimately) or netflix them, or borrow them from the library.   The scary thing is, most people of my generation are just. like. me.

The cable company that you buy internet access from?

who else will you get internet from? You either dance with the devil or use your iphone at home too instead of just everywhere else.

Some places still have mom-and-pops who use the DSL common carrier rules to deliver broadband.  Here is mine:

http://www.sonic.net/


In a free market I would be able to do that. Unfortunately, my building had a contract with comcast so guess how many options I have.
 
2014-05-20 07:07:15 PM  
We seriously need to go AT&T breakup * 10,000 on these guys. And I mean that literally. Comcast Manhattan Island 1 through Comcast Manhattan Island 500 would all be distinct financial entities with no interests outside Manhattan Island and only providing data services to their customers. And do similar breakups based on the population of the local area throughout the United States. Each financially distinct and only serving the area in question (i.e. the owners of Comcast Manhattan Island 1 can't own significant shares of Comcast Brooklyn 300 nor Comcast Manhattan 255 or any other ISP).

The only other option is to recognize that data services is a natural monopoly and put the Post Office in charge of the US telecommunications, what should have been done when the telegraph was invented.
 
2014-05-20 07:08:55 PM  

Jaws_Victim: haemaker: Jaws_Victim: jigger: Lexx: Good luck, cable companies.  I'm not a cord cutter.  I'm a cord NEVER.  I either stream for free (legitimately) or netflix them, or borrow them from the library.   The scary thing is, most people of my generation are just. like. me.

The cable company that you buy internet access from?

who else will you get internet from? You either dance with the devil or use your iphone at home too instead of just everywhere else.

Some places still have mom-and-pops who use the DSL common carrier rules to deliver broadband.  Here is mine:

http://www.sonic.net/

In a free market I would be able to do that. Unfortunately, my building had a contract with comcast so guess how many options I have.


Three.  Comcast, DSL over your phone line, or put up a satellite dish.
 
2014-05-20 07:16:28 PM  

Lexx: Good luck, cable companies.  I'm not a cord cutter.  I'm a cord NEVER.  I either stream for free (legitimately) or netflix them, or borrow them from the library.   The scary thing is, most people of my generation are just. like. me.


They're really not.  Most people of every generation are still traditional television watchers.  The average 18-24 year old still watches about 22 hours of television per week and consumes 73% of his visual media through "traditional television viewing."  That compares to the average 35-49 year-old who watches 33.5 hours of television per week and consumes 79% of visual media through "traditional television viewing."  More young people are viewing media in non-traditional ways, but it's not having a hugely significant impact.

Certainly pay television companies are concerned about people who have never used their products, but when fewer than 5% of the population are true "cord-cutters," it's largely still an academic concern.
 
2014-05-20 07:18:24 PM  

rugman11: Lexx: Good luck, cable companies.  I'm not a cord cutter.  I'm a cord NEVER.  I either stream for free (legitimately) or netflix them, or borrow them from the library.   The scary thing is, most people of my generation are just. like. me.

They're really not.  Most people of every generation are still traditional television watchers.  The average 18-24 year old still watches about 22 hours of television per week and consumes 73% of his visual media through "traditional television viewing."  That compares to the average 35-49 year-old who watches 33.5 hours of television per week and consumes 79% of visual media through "traditional television viewing."  More young people are viewing media in non-traditional ways, but it's not having a hugely significant impact.

Certainly pay television companies are concerned about people who have never used their products, but when fewer than 5% of the population are true "cord-cutters," it's largely still an academic concern.


Forgot my citation.
 
2014-05-20 07:25:41 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: Someone has to pay for that


How about the advertisers, now that the average length of a half hour show has decreased from 28 minutes to 21 minutes?
 
2014-05-20 07:44:35 PM  

jigger: Lexx: Good luck, cable companies.  I'm not a cord cutter.  I'm a cord NEVER.  I either stream for free (legitimately) or netflix them, or borrow them from the library.   The scary thing is, most people of my generation are just. like. me.

The cable company that you buy internet access from?


Not everyone gets internet from a cable company. Sadly, that's becoming harder to do, and one day I'd love to have the option to just get internet from a pure internet company. It should be regulated like a utility.
 
2014-05-20 08:08:50 PM  

rwdavis: The only other option is to recognize that data services is a natural monopoly and put the Post Office in charge of the US telecommunications, what should have been done when the telegraph was invented.


This. The post office is horribly underutilized for its pervasiveness in the US, and making use of them as hubs for all sorts of official government services and transactions should be encouraged.
 
2014-05-20 08:23:12 PM  

The_Time_Master: Debeo Summa Credo: Someone has to pay for that

How about the advertisers, now that the average length of a half hour show has decreased from 28 minutes to 21 minutes?


Uh citation please. I believe when you say that there is more advertising, but that's a huge difference and I never remember 28 minutes of show per half hour.

Maybe you're going back to honeymooners or howdy doody time when they'd pause for two minutes to thank their sponsor, chesterfield cigarettes.

Plus, DVRs mean a lot of those commercials are being watched by only half the viewers.
 
2014-05-20 08:45:37 PM  
I wouldn't so much mind dropping DirecTv and going to strictly OTA, if OTA viewing options weren't complete shiat.
 
2014-05-20 08:51:16 PM  

rugman11: rugman11: Lexx: Good luck, cable companies.  I'm not a cord cutter.  I'm a cord NEVER.  I either stream for free (legitimately) or netflix them, or borrow them from the library.   The scary thing is, most people of my generation are just. like. me.

They're really not.  Most people of every generation are still traditional television watchers.  The average 18-24 year old still watches about 22 hours of television per week and consumes 73% of his visual media through "traditional television viewing."  That compares to the average 35-49 year-old who watches 33.5 hours of television per week and consumes 79% of visual media through "traditional television viewing."  More young people are viewing media in non-traditional ways, but it's not having a hugely significant impact.

Certainly pay television companies are concerned about people who have never used their products, but when fewer than 5% of the population are true "cord-cutters," it's largely still an academic concern.

Forgot my citation.


Your citation doesn't mention anything but how people are using more mobile apps to view stuff then last year, wrong link?  I just have to ask as well though:  are you sure that's 33.5 hours a week for 35-49?  The average is almost every waking hour outside of work parked in front of a TV watching cable garbage?  If that's true and its not per month just nuke the US from orbit, seriously just nuke it from orbit.  That's sad on so many levels.

/cord cutter and virtually none of my friends remain with cable, I guess we're all exceptionally above average.
 
2014-05-20 08:57:16 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: The_Time_Master: Debeo Summa Credo: Someone has to pay for that

How about the advertisers, now that the average length of a half hour show has decreased from 28 minutes to 21 minutes?

Uh citation please. I believe when you say that there is more advertising, but that's a huge difference and I never remember 28 minutes of show per half hour.

Maybe you're going back to honeymooners or howdy doody time when they'd pause for two minutes to thank their sponsor, chesterfield cigarettes.

Plus, DVRs mean a lot of those commercials are being watched by only half the viewers.


http://www.waynesthisandthat.com/commerciallength.htm

Quick google search turned up that

Summary
1952 - 13 percent of the time was spent watching commercials (only 4 minutes out of every half hour!)
1958 - 13 percent
1961 - 18 percent
1963 - 20 percent
1964 - 18 percent
1976 - 17 percent
1977 - 18 percent
1981 - 18 percent
1990 - 22 percent
1994 -24 percent
2001 - 30 percent
2004 - 30 percent
2006 - 30 percent
2007 - 30 percent
2008 - 32 percent
2009 - 30 percent
2010 - 32 percent
2011 - 31 percent
2012 - 33 percent
2013 - 32 percent
 
2014-05-20 09:01:42 PM  

Sergeant Grumbles: rwdavis: The only other option is to recognize that data services is a natural monopoly and put the Post Office in charge of the US telecommunications, what should have been done when the telegraph was invented.

This. The post office is horribly underutilized for its pervasiveness in the US, and making use of them as hubs for all sorts of official government services and transactions should be encouraged.


Um guys?  Yeah, you know there's these things called central offices and they are all over the US.  Generally larger than post offices.  They've got things called backup generators that keep them going when the power goes out.  Well anyway - you see there used to be this organization that was heavily regulated by the government, but wasn't actually part of the government.  See, they used to own most, but not quite all of those central offices.  That organization was blocked from doing anything other than providing telephone service.  You know, like in a system - that was universally available.  Their profit was even capped, and had to invest everything else back into the network.

Does this ring a Bell with anyone?

Does any one care?  I remember something about caring... or not.  That's right - we aren't supposed to care.  But we aren't omnipotent anymore.

I'm absolutely sure there are a bunch of guys in Dallas and Basking Ridge that wouldn't mind being allowed to undo the mistakes of the past and eliminate those upstarts.  They are not the ones you have to convince.  Everyone else might have a problem.  12.5% return on the rate base is all they ask.  I wonder if anyone any noticed that 12.5% is a piece of eight...
 
2014-05-20 09:03:01 PM  

haemaker: Three.  Comcast, DSL over your phone line, or put up a satellite dish.


Satellite internet is internet of last resort, barely preferable over dialup. Even if you don't care about lag because you don't game, the cost vs. bandwidth cap is atrocious. At least you get unlimited from midnight to 6am or so...
 
2014-05-20 09:16:59 PM  

MadHatter500: Sergeant Grumbles: rwdavis: The only other option is to recognize that data services is a natural monopoly and put the Post Office in charge of the US telecommunications, what should have been done when the telegraph was invented.

This. The post office is horribly underutilized for its pervasiveness in the US, and making use of them as hubs for all sorts of official government services and transactions should be encouraged.

Um guys?  Yeah, you know there's these things called central offices and they are all over the US.  Generally larger than post offices.  They've got things called backup generators that keep them going when the power goes out.  Well anyway - you see there used to be this organization that was heavily regulated by the government, but wasn't actually part of the government.  See, they used to own most, but not quite all of those central offices.  That organization was blocked from doing anything other than providing telephone service.  You know, like in a system - that was universally available.  Their profit was even capped, and had to invest everything else back into the network.

Does this ring a Bell with anyone?

Does any one care?  I remember something about caring... or not.  That's right - we aren't supposed to care.  But we aren't omnipotent anymore.

I'm absolutely sure there are a bunch of guys in Dallas and Basking Ridge that wouldn't mind being allowed to undo the mistakes of the past and eliminate those upstarts.  They are not the ones you have to convince.  Everyone else might have a problem.  12.5% return on the rate base is all they ask.  I wonder if anyone any noticed that 12.5% is a piece of eight...


They have the essential problem of being privately owned when there's no good reason for them to be privately owned. If it's something the entire community uses, then the entire community should own it.
 
2014-05-20 09:17:30 PM  
I dumped cable three years ago. It was weird for a week or two.
 
2014-05-20 09:22:42 PM  

Debeo Summa Credo: The_Time_Master: Debeo Summa Credo: Someone has to pay for that

How about the advertisers, now that the average length of a half hour show has decreased from 28 minutes to 21 minutes?

Uh citation please. I believe when you say that there is more advertising, but that's a huge difference and I never remember 28 minutes of show per half hour.

Maybe you're going back to honeymooners or howdy doody time when they'd pause for two minutes to thank their sponsor, chesterfield cigarettes.

Plus, DVRs mean a lot of those commercials are being watched by only half the viewers.




Some of those Saturday morning commercials cartoon shows are a full 30 minutes.
 
2014-05-20 10:04:32 PM  

BumpInTheNight: rugman11: rugman11: Lexx: Good luck, cable companies.  I'm not a cord cutter.  I'm a cord NEVER.  I either stream for free (legitimately) or netflix them, or borrow them from the library.   The scary thing is, most people of my generation are just. like. me.

They're really not.  Most people of every generation are still traditional television watchers.  The average 18-24 year old still watches about 22 hours of television per week and consumes 73% of his visual media through "traditional television viewing."  That compares to the average 35-49 year-old who watches 33.5 hours of television per week and consumes 79% of visual media through "traditional television viewing."  More young people are viewing media in non-traditional ways, but it's not having a hugely significant impact.

Certainly pay television companies are concerned about people who have never used their products, but when fewer than 5% of the population are true "cord-cutters," it's largely still an academic concern.

Forgot my citation.

Your citation doesn't mention anything but how people are using more mobile apps to view stuff then last year, wrong link?  I just have to ask as well though:  are you sure that's 33.5 hours a week for 35-49?  The average is almost every waking hour outside of work parked in front of a TV watching cable garbage?  If that's true and its not per month just nuke the US from orbit, seriously just nuke it from orbit.  That's sad on so many levels.

/cord cutter and virtually none of my friends remain with cable, I guess we're all exceptionally above average.


Sorry, I didn't want to link directly to a PDF, so I linked the landing page.  Just click "Request Report Download" or you can get the direct link here.

As for the 35-49, that's the mean, so it's probably on the high side.  The median for all viewers is around 24 hours per week, so the mean is probably skewed by people who are home all day long (and with more than one-third of all adults not in the labor force, that number is pretty large.  Either way, traditional television viewing is still significantly greater than streaming, which is also dominated by the power users.

/The Top 20% of television viewers watch almost 11 hours per day, on average.
 
2014-05-20 10:10:08 PM  

MadHatter500: Does this ring a Bell with anyone?


Yes, but you're being so cryptically mysterious I really don't know what you're trying to say about the whole thing.
 
2014-05-20 11:06:21 PM  

rwdavis: Debeo Summa Credo: The_Time_Master: Debeo Summa Credo: Someone has to pay for that

How about the advertisers, now that the average length of a half hour show has decreased from 28 minutes to 21 minutes?

Uh citation please. I believe when you say that there is more advertising, but that's a huge difference and I never remember 28 minutes of show per half hour.

Maybe you're going back to honeymooners or howdy doody time when they'd pause for two minutes to thank their sponsor, chesterfield cigarettes.

Plus, DVRs mean a lot of those commercials are being watched by only half the viewers.

http://www.waynesthisandthat.com/commerciallength.htm

Quick google search turned up that

Summary
1952 - 13 percent of the time was spent watching commercials (only 4 minutes out of every half hour!)
1958 - 13 percent
1961 - 18 percent
1963 - 20 percent
1964 - 18 percent
1976 - 17 percent
1977 - 18 percent
1981 - 18 percent
1990 - 22 percent
1994 -24 percent
2001 - 30 percent
2004 - 30 percent
2006 - 30 percent
2007 - 30 percent
2008 - 32 percent
2009 - 30 percent
2010 - 32 percent
2011 - 31 percent
2012 - 33 percent
2013 - 32 percent


So the commercial:show ratio has been stable for about two and a half decades.
 
2014-05-20 11:34:54 PM  
"Cable operators" for the purposes of this report include both coaxial cable and fiber services such as Verizon FiOS. The FCC didn't list prices by company, but broke out measurements of communities that have competition vs. communities without competition.

Of course they didn't.  Hard to get a job with Comcast after you've been with the FCC and told people exactly how much people are getting screwed to XFinity and beyond.
 
2014-05-20 11:50:54 PM  

Delta1212: rwdavis: Debeo Summa Credo: The_Time_Master: Debeo Summa Credo: Someone has to pay for that

How about the advertisers, now that the average length of a half hour show has decreased from 28 minutes to 21 minutes?

Uh citation please. I believe when you say that there is more advertising, but that's a huge difference and I never remember 28 minutes of show per half hour.

Maybe you're going back to honeymooners or howdy doody time when they'd pause for two minutes to thank their sponsor, chesterfield cigarettes.

Plus, DVRs mean a lot of those commercials are being watched by only half the viewers.

http://www.waynesthisandthat.com/commerciallength.htm

Quick google search turned up that

Summary
1952 - 13 percent of the time was spent watching commercials (only 4 minutes out of every half hour!)
1958 - 13 percent
1961 - 18 percent
1963 - 20 percent
1964 - 18 percent
1976 - 17 percent
1977 - 18 percent
1981 - 18 percent
1990 - 22 percent
1994 -24 percent
2001 - 30 percent
2004 - 30 percent
2006 - 30 percent
2007 - 30 percent
2008 - 32 percent
2009 - 30 percent
2010 - 32 percent
2011 - 31 percent
2012 - 33 percent
2013 - 32 percent

So the commercial:show ratio has been stable for about two and a half decades.


Which would imply that their costs have either stabilized or gone down, implying that the cost of cable services should also be going down.
 
2014-05-21 12:47:50 AM  
The wifey and I were at the store last weekend when the DTV sales douches were out in force.. "Good day sir, might we ask what your tv service is?" .. "Netflix" ... "Oh, who's your internet service?" ... "century link DSL" .. "Oh, if you bundle with DTV we could save you a ton." ... "Really, you could beat $37 price for life? 'Cause last time I had you it went up to 140/month in less than the first year." ... "uh, well uhm, uh.." ... "Have a good day and good luck finding a sucker".

Wife thinks I'm a dick, but entertaining dick nonetheless.
 
2014-05-21 07:52:45 AM  

rwdavis: We seriously need to go AT&T breakup * 10,000 on these guys. And I mean that literally. Comcast Manhattan Island 1 through Comcast Manhattan Island 500 would all be distinct financial entities with no interests outside Manhattan Island and only providing data services to their customers. And do similar breakups based on the population of the local area throughout the United States. Each financially distinct and only serving the area in question (i.e. the owners of Comcast Manhattan Island 1 can't own significant shares of Comcast Brooklyn 300 nor Comcast Manhattan 255 or any other ISP).

The only other option is to recognize that data services is a natural monopoly and put the Post Office in charge of the US telecommunications, what should have been done when the telegraph was invented.


Or have the government (or a Quango) own the core infrastructure and have companies all bulk buy capacity from that entity wholesale and sell it on to customers, do soft support, so that they will be competing with each other and keeping prices low, plus it means their interests align with pressuring the government to keep the infrastructure reliable and fast enough to meet demand from their customers).
 
2014-05-21 10:27:08 AM  

xria: rwdavis: We seriously need to go AT&T breakup * 10,000 on these guys. And I mean that literally. Comcast Manhattan Island 1 through Comcast Manhattan Island 500 would all be distinct financial entities with no interests outside Manhattan Island and only providing data services to their customers. And do similar breakups based on the population of the local area throughout the United States. Each financially distinct and only serving the area in question (i.e. the owners of Comcast Manhattan Island 1 can't own significant shares of Comcast Brooklyn 300 nor Comcast Manhattan 255 or any other ISP).

The only other option is to recognize that data services is a natural monopoly and put the Post Office in charge of the US telecommunications, what should have been done when the telegraph was invented.

Or have the government (or a Quango) own the core infrastructure and have companies all bulk buy capacity from that entity wholesale and sell it on to customers, do soft support, so that they will be competing with each other and keeping prices low, plus it means their interests align with pressuring the government to keep the infrastructure reliable and fast enough to meet demand from their customers).


That's the UK method. BT owns the network but must allow any ISP or phone company access that the same price and service as their own customer facing business. So I have 200 ISPs to choose from and genuine competition. They've just gone fibre ( FTTC ) and the service is good. I get a reliable 25mbps and unlimited download with no caps, which isn't bad since I live a fair way from the cabinet.
 
2014-05-21 10:57:08 AM  
Perhaps South Park should do an episode about this.
 
2014-05-21 11:38:39 AM  

Delta1212: rwdavis:
Summary
1952 - 13 percent of the time was spent watching commercials (only 4 minutes out of every half hour!)
1958 - 13 percent
1961 - 18 percent
1963 - 20 percent
1964 - 18 percent
1976 - 17 percent
1977 - 18 percent
1981 - 18 percent
1990 - 22 percent
1994 -24 percent
2001 - 30 percent
2004 - 30 percent
2006 - 30 percent
2007 - 30 percent
2008 - 32 percent
2009 - 30 percent
2010 - 32 percent
2011 - 31 percent
2012 - 33 percent
2013 - 32 percent

So the commercial:show ratio has been stable for about two and a half decades.


? It's gone up by 50% in the last two and a half decades. It's been stable for only 13 years or so.
 
2014-05-21 11:40:10 AM  

Delta1212: So the commercial:show ratio has been stable for about two and a half decades.


In what universe does one equate "stable" with "increased by nearly 50%"?
 
2014-05-21 11:42:01 AM  

dukeblue219: Delta1212: rwdavis:

? It's gone up by 50% in the last two and a half decades. It's been stable for only 13 years or so.


Beat me to it, I see.

/read the thread, then refresh, then reply.
 
2014-05-21 11:43:13 AM  

jst3p: kittyhas1000legs: Until they offer a-la-carte programming I'll stick with the antenna and FTA dish. And free Hulu. And other methods.

We significantly scaled down. Bundled Xfinity ($20 a month for 2 HD boxes that include locals, TBS and Ondemand which is a nice way of not needing a DVR), Roku for netflix and hulu plus and amazon.

All in all we are saving ~$100 a month and still have more than we can possibly watch. I miss some niche shows but many of them can be watched with an HDMI cable hooked up to a laptop.


You must have had a pretty high-end cable package before, right? If you're currently paying $20 for Xfinity + $9 for Netflix + $8 for Hulu Plus + whatever you buy on Amazon Instant and you're still saving $100 on TV alone... then it seems like you were getting ripped off before.

I ask because I've looked at "cutting the cord" and it never really made sense. I pay $89/mo for 50Mbps internet and TV from FiOS, and if I dropped the TV I'd save only $40, partly because the internet cost would go up slightly. Adding Hulu Plus and paying for shows $1.99 at a time would bring me pretty much back to even again, not to mention the live sports issues.
 
2014-05-21 11:47:24 AM  

dukeblue219: Delta1212: rwdavis:
Summary
1952 - 13 percent of the time was spent watching commercials (only 4 minutes out of every half hour!)
1958 - 13 percent
1961 - 18 percent
1963 - 20 percent
1964 - 18 percent
1976 - 17 percent
1977 - 18 percent
1981 - 18 percent
1990 - 22 percent
1994 -24 percent
2001 - 30 percent
2004 - 30 percent
2006 - 30 percent
2007 - 30 percent
2008 - 32 percent
2009 - 30 percent
2010 - 32 percent
2011 - 31 percent
2012 - 33 percent
2013 - 32 percent

So the commercial:show ratio has been stable for about two and a half decades.

? It's gone up by 50% in the last two and a half decades. It's been stable for only 13 years or so.


Oops. One, one and a half decades.
 
2014-05-21 12:36:32 PM  

dukeblue219: Delta1212: rwdavis:
Summary
1952 - 13 percent of the time was spent watching commercials (only 4 minutes out of every half hour!)
1958 - 13 percent
1961 - 18 percent
1963 - 20 percent
1964 - 18 percent
1976 - 17 percent
1977 - 18 percent
1981 - 18 percent
1990 - 22 percent
1994 -24 percent
2001 - 30 percent
2004 - 30 percent
2006 - 30 percent
2007 - 30 percent
2008 - 32 percent
2009 - 30 percent
2010 - 32 percent
2011 - 31 percent
2012 - 33 percent
2013 - 32 percent

So the commercial:show ratio has been stable for about two and a half decades.

? It's gone up by 50% in the last two and a half decades. It's been stable for only 13 years or so.


13 years seems like a pretty long time for stability to me.
 
2014-05-21 01:17:08 PM  

Lexx: Good luck, cable companies.  I'm not a cord cutter.  I'm a cord NEVER.  I either stream for free (legitimately) or netflix them, or borrow them from the library.   The scary thing is, most people of my generation are just. like. me.


What's funny is their response to your demographic is "well, one day you'll have families and you'll want what cable TV offers"

I think it's safe to say, that the majority of you won't. I'm a cord cutter, 33 YO, with a 2.5 year old son who watches stuff from Netflix. He points to his favorite show (currently Team Umi-Zoomi) and really has no concept of "waiting" to watch something. He may never see a commercial again, never wait until 8:00 pm to watch something.

Whether this is good or bad for him is unknown. It's definitely bad for the cable companies though.

Cable's days, well at least its ultra high two-digit percentage share, are numbered.
 
Displayed 50 of 53 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report