At least there are changes in the tv business. For better or worse I for 1 welcome it.
Al A Carte is in the future...
- Thread starter KaptainRandom
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 98
- Views 9K
A la carte can work and be a huge savings but not for everyone. It really is only helpful for the customer that only wants a handful of channels. The customer that needs over 20 different channels because of their needs or their family's needs would be better off getting a packaged deal. I agree that both options should be available to the customer. That's about the only way to make the majority of people happy. I would be one of those people that benefit from a packaged deal because my family watches a wide range of shows and enjoys having options.
A la carte will be work for me. If will be work like in Canada, (2 channel for $2.99 or 1 for 2.49, Even if one of these network cost the double). I want TNT, TBS, FX, FXX, USA, SyFy, plus the base package (local, PI,shopping, free channel (Like religious), Promotion).
Example:
Welcome pack $19.99
FX/FXX $2.99
USA/SyFy $2.99
TNT/Reelz $3.99
TOTAL $29.96
HDNET if not in any base package.
Example:
Welcome pack $19.99
FX/FXX $2.99
USA/SyFy $2.99
TNT/Reelz $3.99
TOTAL $29.96
HDNET if not in any base package.
And if enough people choose Over The Top as opposed to Sat/Cable, there will be many fewer channels with endless reality show reruns. And what about Mark Cuban's contention that with the internet soon regulated under an 80 year old communication law, that since a bit is a bit, all distribution would be regulated (dare I say it), neutrally, thus leading to inevitable slow downs and buffering delays, even on cable?
I only watch USA,TNT,HGTV, and free OTA channels. Why pay for network streaming, if you can get it free OTA.
With net neutrality, all data will move like flowing water. The shortest fastest route available without regard to type/source/destination of data.
I'm not an a-la-carte naysayer, I know that it can work, but not at these prices. Of course that is because the programmers DO NOT want it to work. I remember when programming prices became reasonable, well, down right cheap from TVRO programmers in the mid 90's. I did quite a bit of a-la-carte back then, but back then, you could get Nickelodeon for a buck or two per month, or $12 or $15 per year. I don't get these folks that say they would rather pay $40 for 5 channels than $80 for 100. Just boggles my mind, perhaps, and I guess that I am, I am a dinosaur and old fashioned, but $6 for Nickelodeon, $6 for CBS, $15 for HBO, and god knows how much for the other channels, just seems stupid to me. I pay Dish about $200-$225 per month, I am not exactly sure how much, anyway, for that I have 4 Hoppers, a wireless Joey and a wired Joey, and I have on-demand, and Dish Anywhere, plus Sling technology. By the time these new streaming channels get done you will have about 25 or 30 for that price. Of course, for those of us that live in rural areas like me, it wouldn't work anyway. For instance, my DSL is only 4.0 down, and that is usually more like 1.5 since it is CenturyLink and is oversold, and there is no cable, so that would be no HD streaming on a big screen TV set. I have AT&T Wireless Home Internet and Exede to make up for CenturyLink's shortfalls, but those are both capped services.
...and I can't fathom spending $200-225 per month for TV, not even half that. The ala carte appeal is for those who aren't power viewers and don't need access to everything. To each his own.
Well, you don't have to spend $200 per month. AT120 is still a better value to most people than CBS and Nickelodeon for $12 per month. Hell, stuck up an antenna and you can get CBS for nothing in 99% of places. I live 65 miles from the transmitter with rugged terrain and get 100% on the CBS affiliate from Birmingham on a Winegard flat panel amplified antenna 15' off the ground.
Also, keep in mind with these streaming services, those in rural areas do not have access to high capped or unlimited bandwidth broadband with speeds like 20, 40, 60, 80, 100, or more Mbps Internet.
One reason I pay so much for TV is I don't go out to movies or sporting events etc... Because I am in a rural area. I also like to have plenty of available tuners, hence the 4 Hoppers. Over $60 of my bill is fees.
Last edited:
I'm not most people. The family has about a dozen channels we watch, but we need AT200 or more to get them. If I could get those dozen channels and pay AT120 prices, then cha-ching.
Well then, that would slow all traffic 'neutrally', not just streaming media.Until it gets to a dam.
Unless illegally throttled due to origin or type.
Can you show a link of examples from Canada Satellite TV of that pricing, starting at $19.99 and at that starting pointing adding channels for 2.99.
Well, then I suppose that streaming is a good fit for your family. So good for you. If you want to pay $6 for Nickelodeon, then that is fine.
why just internet? Also, at $6 a month how long do you think Nick would survive? I'd wager at $6 a month Nick wouldn't last a year, you can ask for all the money you want but if their is little or no demand for the crap you put out there you will fold like every other business that has failed before you.
As any entity should if they don't provide a compelling service, not piggyback off another popular service as we now have with bundling.
I get the feeling what is actually happening isn't what some or many think. While your speeds won't be throttled for certain services, you will simply pay more - alot more - for the speeds needed to stream. Instead of Netflix paying more to access the speeds, you will pay more. And the Government now will raise taxes to pay for their overseeing everything. I'm actually not totally against the new law and making them utilities, I didn't think it was fair to slow down certain services. Unfortunately that is going to mean you get the same speed for everything, and pay a higher price even if you don't stream or stream much.
Some form of A la Carte can work, even if only for some. Maybe a metered way could be better I don't know. But I see people still underestimating how much channels will cost. I guess if your attitude is paying $40 for 5 channels is better than $50 for 100 A La Carte will work.
