Social Feed
Well today is the day that the Big Ten channel launches. It is showing active on 220 but will not have any content until 8 PM. We are almost there.
60 Replies
·
8416 views
Everyone important cares (me) about the BTN.
Unless the cable and satellite providers go al a carte, many of us will continue to subsidize a great many channels that should not be on the air. Personally, I would rather pay the same price for the 15-20 channels we actively watch...just so the 200+ bandwidth wasters (Spike, FX, QVC, Sci-Fi, etc.) will be forced to stand on their own or cease to exist. Although I am a sports lover, I think it is a crime the hugely expensive ESPNs are forced down all subscribers throats...even those who don't watch sports.Al a carte is al a smart! Let's all pay for programming we wish to receive...and nothing more!
There is nothing you can show me since you're not understanding the problem. You are focusing on price and not the real issue at the heart of the matter. The real issue is that customers are paying for programming they do not want, programming they do not support, and programming they may even find objectionable. Why should a customer pay to support my watching ESPN when they don't watch sports and may even find boxing and football objectionable? And why should I pay to support someone watching the MAMBLA Lifestyle Channel or the Terrorist Network when the thought of a portion of my monthly subscription going toward supporting Man-Boy Love and terrorism is reprehensible?
There is a lot of programming that a subscriber may find offensive because it glorifies violence and disrespects women by treating them in a demeaning fashion, for example. Sure, the customer can simply "lock the channel" and perhaps remove it from their guide, but why should they be paying to support this channnel in the first place? It is not fair and it is not what the majority of American's want.
In our case we subscribe to Dish Network's AT250, but we only watch 15-20 channels...and three of those are "must have" which are only available in the AT250 programming pack. Personally, I am willing to pay just as much, if not more, for programming we actually watch. Like a large number of Americans, I am not willing to pay one cent towards programming I do not watch, do not want, and do not support in any form or fashion.
While the mega-programming packs may be most cost efficient, they are certainly not the only choices that should be offered to consumers. Personally, I really like the programming tiers, programming packs, and a la carte options being offered by StarChoice satellite service in Canada. I am not against the mega-programming packs, but consumers need to have a lot more programming pack and a la carte options available to them.
Now, I'll be more than happy if you can show me how funds from my AT250 subscription are not going to support Sci-Fi, FX, BET, and two hundred other channels I don't want?
There is nothing you can show me since you're not understanding the problem. You are focusing on price and not the real issue at the heart of the matter. The real issue is that customers are paying for programming they do not want, programming they do not support, and programming they may even find objectionable. Why should a customer pay to support my watching ESPN when they don't watch sports and may even find boxing and football objectionable? And why should I pay to support someone watching the MAMBLA Lifestyle Channel or the Terrorist Network when the thought of a portion of my monthly subscription going toward supporting Man-Boy Love and terrorism is reprehensible?
There is a lot of programming that a subscriber may find offensive because it glorifies violence and disrespects women by treating them in a demeaning fashion, for example. Sure, the customer can simply "lock the channel" and perhaps remove it from their guide, but why should they be paying to support this channnel in the first place? It is not fair and it is not what the majority of American's want.
In our case we subscribe to Dish Network's AT250, but we only watch 15-20 channels...and three of those are "must have" which are only available in the AT250 programming pack. Personally, I am willing to pay just as much, if not more, for programming we actually watch. Like a large number of Americans, I am not willing to pay one cent towards programming I do not watch, do not want, and do not support in any form or fashion.
While the mega-programming packs may be most cost efficient, they are certainly not the only choices that should be offered to consumers. Personally, I really like the programming tiers, programming packs, and a la carte options being offered by StarChoice satellite service in Canada. I am not against the mega-programming packs, but consumers need to have a lot more programming pack and a la carte options available to them.
Now, I'll be more than happy if you can show me how funds from my AT250 subscription are not going to support Sci-Fi, FX, BET, and two hundred other channels I don't want?
We may get asked to not carry on this conversation here, but I will go with it until asked to do so.
I agree wholeheartedly about paying for content you may find objectional. The only reason It costs $15 a month if you want the Playboy channel is because there are alot of people who would complain if that channel was offered in a regular package on any cable or satellite service.
What's wrong with al-a-cart is this. Right now as it stands Fox News is one of the most costly channels for any service to offer its customers. Espn falls in right after that. The last I had heard Fox News charges $.42 per subscriber for D* or any service to carry it. So D* ponie's up $.42 per its 16 million subscribers. So D* pays Fox News $6,720,000 a year to broadcast their channel on their satellite service. Let's say only 3 million of D* viewers actually tune into Fox News at all on a regular basis. (I imagine that number is not far off). So the other 13 million subscribers would never pay for Fox News in their Al-a-cart service if given the opportunity. So now if Al-a-cart is offered only 3 million customers pay $.42 for Fox News Channel. Now Fox News is only recieving $1.2 million from D* for carrying their channels as opposed to the $7.6 million they do currently. Now if that happens for all channels on all cable and satellite providers, that means the owners of these channels are losing millions of dollars because only a few million people actually watch their channels anyway. (USA Network is the most watched cable channel with an average of 5 million viewers a week).
So where are these companies going to make up for their losses on providing their channels to cable and satellite subscribers? They won't jack the price up for its advertisers, that would send them packing too. What would happen is to make up that extra $6.4 million Fox News would lose they would make their channel cost to the customer $2.23 per customer. Now if all your channels cost anywhere from $1.50 to $2.25 per channel, you add that up between how many channels you watch even on a non-regular basis. For me and the average consumer it is usually $20 or more than they pay for their current cable or satellite bill.
You can actually look at a channel like the Playboy channel as an al-acart-channel already. Because so much of the majority of people do not watch it, it is not worth bundling it into any package. So because the numbers are less than 40,000 people who subscribe to it, they need to charge $15.00 a month. It takes a lot of money to run a studio, and studio costs do not vary much channel to channel. So it costs roughly the same amount of money to be a cable channel whether you are Playboy, Fox News, ESPN, or Nikolodeon.
And that my friends is why Al-a-cart is not a good decision, and why the cable and satellite company's are fighting it. Because it is for us the consumers, not their own pocket book. They will make money either way.
Free Enterprise is what works, not the governments involvement.
Sorry Stone,
I live 20 minutes from BG and have a neice thats a junior down there
If Toledo would have played well enough to be in the game with Purdue it would have been a better weekend yet.
Jimbo
i went through there on way from chicago to nashville last winter following wild.Sorry Stone,
I live 20 minutes from BG and have a neice thats a junior down there
If Toledo would have played well enough to be in the game with Purdue it would have been a better weekend yet.
Jimbo
my hopes for gophers are gone i will be bringing my psp for Miami ohio next week
iJustine
Time for another AWESOME video from iJustine!
View: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/cptJK6wlKJY
Direct YouTube Link - Will the iPhone Duo fit in a pocket?
The official iJustine Website's Website
Buy her book!
View: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/cptJK6wlKJY
Direct YouTube Link - Will the iPhone Duo fit in a pocket?
The official iJustine Website's Website
Buy her book!
0 Replies
·
0 views
TWiT Tech Podcast Network
Time for another AWESOME video from the TWIT Network!
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0_HFoQcM7U
Direct YouTube Link - Tech News Weekly 460
TWIT's Website
TWIT Live Feed
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0_HFoQcM7U
Direct YouTube Link - Tech News Weekly 460
TWIT's Website
TWIT Live Feed
0 Replies
·
0 views
Supporting Founder
Lifetime Supporter
I was reading this article
thehill.com
That said this-
Last summer, for the first time, streaming services like Netflix and Amazon Prime claimed the largest share of the television viewing audience, surpassing both cable and broadcast TV. Streaming captured 34.8 percent of July viewers, according to Nielsen data, compared to 34.4 percent for cable and 21.6 percent for broadcast.
And then, sometime in the second half of 2022, cord-cutters became the majority. The share of cable and satellite television subscribers dipped to 48 percent, according to a report from Samba TV, a television technology company.
Now I do not consider those with YTTV and the likes, Cord Cutters, but they still do not have Traditional Cable/Satellite delivered Live TV, so I decided to do the math.
There are, now, 129 Million Households in the United States.
In 2015, there were 100 Million Cable/Sat Subscribers , no streaming Live TV Service.
Today, there are 66 Million Live TV subscribers, including Cable, Satellite and Streaming.
Roughly, Streaming Live TV has 14 Million subs including all of them.
So that means, Cable/Satellite now has, roughly, 51 Million Households
So in just 8 years, lost 49% of their subscribers and by the end of this year, expected sub count to be, roughly, 45 million households.
That means a total loss of 55% since 2015 at the end of 2023.
But out of 129 Million households, 45 million will mean only 35% will get Cable/Satellite Delivered Live TV by the end of 2023.
Imagine what 2024 will be like.
Cable TV ‘cord-cutters’ became the majority in 2022
The steady decline of cable and broadcast television, and the rise of streaming services, reached a sort of inflection point over the past year. Last summer, for the first time, streaming ser…
thehill.com
That said this-
Last summer, for the first time, streaming services like Netflix and Amazon Prime claimed the largest share of the television viewing audience, surpassing both cable and broadcast TV. Streaming captured 34.8 percent of July viewers, according to Nielsen data, compared to 34.4 percent for cable and 21.6 percent for broadcast.
And then, sometime in the second half of 2022, cord-cutters became the majority. The share of cable and satellite television subscribers dipped to 48 percent, according to a report from Samba TV, a television technology company.
Now I do not consider those with YTTV and the likes, Cord Cutters, but they still do not have Traditional Cable/Satellite delivered Live TV, so I decided to do the math.
There are, now, 129 Million Households in the United States.
In 2015, there were 100 Million Cable/Sat Subscribers , no streaming Live TV Service.
Today, there are 66 Million Live TV subscribers, including Cable, Satellite and Streaming.
Roughly, Streaming Live TV has 14 Million subs including all of them.
So that means, Cable/Satellite now has, roughly, 51 Million Households
So in just 8 years, lost 49% of their subscribers and by the end of this year, expected sub count to be, roughly, 45 million households.
That means a total loss of 55% since 2015 at the end of 2023.
But out of 129 Million households, 45 million will mean only 35% will get Cable/Satellite Delivered Live TV by the end of 2023.
Imagine what 2024 will be like.
875 Replies
·
71304 views
Some interesting information was in this article-
This first-
The total pay-TV sector (traditional service providers and virtual MVPDs) shed 885,000 subscribers in Q2 2026
So with the loss of 2.03 Million in the first quarter, already at 2.915 Million gone this year, two quarters left to report.
#2-
The segment ended Q2 with 61.51 million subs comprising 27.5 million cable video subs, 21.42 million vMVPD customers, 9.56 million satellite TV customers, and 3.01 million telco TV subs.
There are approximately 133.97 million households in the United States, according to recent YCharts US Households Data from mid-2026.
That means more than 72 Million households do not have a paid live TV service, about 54% of the total.
What is worse, 7 years ago, paid live TV had over 80% of the population subscribing ( about 100 Million), almost all were Cable/Satellite customers.
Today, only about 37 Million subscribe to Cable/Satellite, less than 28% of our population.
#3-
At one time, Satellite TV (Dish and DirecTV), had about 34 Million subscribers added together, now, 9.56 Million.
That is over a 70% loss for those who subscribe to Satellite TV.
For Cable TV, not as bad, since they have broadband to help against the losses ( bundles), but as more options appear ( 5G, fiber, starlink, etc), I expect a big increase in those leaving cable.
Also expect YTTV to really start gaining even more subscribers, for those who still wish to have a live TV service, based on price point and it is a really great service.
50M subs might be the 'floor' for US pay-TV
Fifty million-plus subs could serve as the 'floor' for US pay-TV by 2030, reckons MoffettNathanson.
www.lightreading.com
This first-
The total pay-TV sector (traditional service providers and virtual MVPDs) shed 885,000 subscribers in Q2 2026
So with the loss of 2.03 Million in the first quarter, already at 2.915 Million gone this year, two quarters left to report.
#2-
The segment ended Q2 with 61.51 million subs comprising 27.5 million cable video subs, 21.42 million vMVPD customers, 9.56 million satellite TV customers, and 3.01 million telco TV subs.
There are approximately 133.97 million households in the United States, according to recent YCharts US Households Data from mid-2026.
That means more than 72 Million households do not have a paid live TV service, about 54% of the total.
What is worse, 7 years ago, paid live TV had over 80% of the population subscribing ( about 100 Million), almost all were Cable/Satellite customers.
Today, only about 37 Million subscribe to Cable/Satellite, less than 28% of our population.
#3-
At one time, Satellite TV (Dish and DirecTV), had about 34 Million subscribers added together, now, 9.56 Million.
That is over a 70% loss for those who subscribe to Satellite TV.
For Cable TV, not as bad, since they have broadband to help against the losses ( bundles), but as more options appear ( 5G, fiber, starlink, etc), I expect a big increase in those leaving cable.
Also expect YTTV to really start gaining even more subscribers, for those who still wish to have a live TV service, based on price point and it is a really great service.
Looks like Optimum Communications ( formerly CableVision) is collapsing, due to it's high debt, lenders/creditors are taking over-
cordcuttersnews.com
The End of Another Major Cable TV Provider? Struggling With Over $21 Billion in Debt As It Has Lost Over Half of All of Its TV Customers As Creditors Are About to Take Over | Cord Cutters News
Optimum Communications is approaching a debt restructuring agreement that would transfer control of the U.S. broadband and cable provider to a group of its primary lenders, according to people familiar with the discussions. The proposed transaction would also resolve ongoing litigation between...
cordcuttersnews.com
Sony is discontinuing it's last 4K disc player, Panasonic has been rumored to be doing the same, the end of physical media is unfortunately, about to happen.
cordcuttersnews.com
Bad News For Blu-ray Fans: Sony Has Stopped Making a Popular Player | Cord Cutters News
Sony has discontinued its final standalone UHD Blu-ray player, the UBP-X700/K, ending shipments of the device with no successor model announced. The move, first spotted by Japanese website Kunkoku.jp and confirmed through the status of the product on Sony’s own website, marks the company’s...
cordcuttersnews.com
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
I'm surprised Walmart hasn't banned this guy from all of their stores. He has been on their CASE the past few months.
View: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/f3zr37ekgKM?feature=share
View: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/f3zr37ekgKM?feature=share
30 Replies
·
289 views
Unless the specific product or its packaging is known at the time of weighing, estimating the tare weight for a PoS system is a tall order.
I'm pretty sure that produce bags can't get any thinner.
You certainly don't want to put unbagged produce on a belt, scale, or in a clerk's hands (gloved or not).
I would think that all the packaging would already be accounted for ... they weigh the container, subtract that from the scale, then add the product , so its weighing the Product onlyUnless the specific product or its packaging is known at the time of weighing, estimating the tare weight for a PoS system is a tall order.
I'm pretty sure that produce bags can't get any thinner.
You certainly don't want to put unbagged produce on a belt, scale, or in a clerk's hands (gloved or not).
Supporting Founder
Lifetime Supporter
Comcast is the first to report, with a massive 274,000 loss in video subscribers.
In the 3Q of 2016, Comcast had 21.42 million video subscribers and was the #1 provider, now at 10.39 million and is the #3 Provider, YTTV is #2 ( who also surpassed DirecTV-8 Million and Dish-under 5 Million), Charter/Spectrum is #1.
cordcuttersnews.com
In the 3Q of 2016, Comcast had 21.42 million video subscribers and was the #1 provider, now at 10.39 million and is the #3 Provider, YTTV is #2 ( who also surpassed DirecTV-8 Million and Dish-under 5 Million), Charter/Spectrum is #1.
Comcast Just Lost 274,000 TV Customers & 144,000 Internet Customers In Just Three Months | Cord Cutters News
Comcast Corporation reported its third-quarter 2026 results on October 22, showing continued erosion in its domestic residential broadband internet and video customer bases as competitive pressures intensified across the connectivity market. The company recorded a net loss of 144,000 domestic...
cordcuttersnews.com
4 Replies
·
56 views
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
He was 71 yrs old. One of my favorite songs is Seminole Wind....the violin is killer.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8sh9P3X33w
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8sh9P3X33w
9 Replies
·
89 views
iJustine
Time for another AWESOME video from iJustine!
View: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/_fUiEcLbmr0
Direct YouTube Link - iPhone 1 vs iPhone Duo!
The official iJustine Website's Website
Buy her book!
View: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/_fUiEcLbmr0
Direct YouTube Link - iPhone 1 vs iPhone Duo!
The official iJustine Website's Website
Buy her book!
0 Replies
·
5 views
Why are ViP922s So rare? like its crazy how ebay has none, i checked everywhere, also, i got a ViP222k now, which is actually activated!
25 Replies
·
628 views
LOL. It depends if the person saw it during the years when they were actually still available which is 1968 to 1983 meaning the person could be 43-58 years old or they can even be a few years old if they learned to read and write at a young age and actually saw a telephone with that label somewhere recently just like even here in San Francisco, payphone still exist physically in public places but whether they can be used or not is a different issue. It still looks like this even today:
I opened my Radio Shack in Sept 1984 and right about that time they did the whole deregulation thing with the phone companies. I bought TONS of those phones that had been refurbished with a new outer shell. You could throw one of those out of a 3 story high window and it would still work.
That was an interesting time in history. I would have older customers come in and ask about phones.....they were terrified that they were going to get into trouble hooking up a second phone without the phone company knowing about it. One of the funniest episodes of WKRP was the one where Johnny thought the cops were showing up because they had an unregistered phone. I guess younger folks can't conceive of a time when you were limited to the number of phones you could have in your house....and limited to the length of the cord
That was an interesting time in history. I would have older customers come in and ask about phones.....they were terrified that they were going to get into trouble hooking up a second phone without the phone company knowing about it. One of the funniest episodes of WKRP was the one where Johnny thought the cops were showing up because they had an unregistered phone. I guess younger folks can't conceive of a time when you were limited to the number of phones you could have in your house....and limited to the length of the cord
The two central offices in the area I worked were actually step by step offices.
Speaking about cords, I actually did drop a Trimline phone from probably 3 feet high on the floor when I was about 10 or so and it caused a small crack, this was the one with the modular jacks and it was hooked up with I think a 50 ft or longer RJ11C cable from Radio Shack. I still use the phone today connected to a Obi VoIP adapter and the cord is my custom made 6 position RJ11C, not sure of the official name for it without looking it up and Belden MediaTwist Crescent shaped Cat6+ cable.I opened my Radio Shack in Sept 1984 and right about that time they did the whole deregulation thing with the phone companies. I bought TONS of those phones that had been refurbished with a new outer shell. You could throw one of those out of a 3 story high window and it would still work.
That was an interesting time in history. I would have older customers come in and ask about phones.....they were terrified that they were going to get into trouble hooking up a second phone without the phone company knowing about it. One of the funniest episodes of WKRP was the one where Johnny thought the cops were showing up because they had an unregistered phone. I guess younger folks can't conceive of a time when you were limited to the number of phones you could have in your house....and limited to the length of the cord
S
so that persons in hiding lol
Linus Tech Tips
Time for another AWESOME video from Linus Tech Tips!
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FH5SoaRx2TA
Direct YouTube Link - There's a Secret (Better) Netflix for Millionaires
Linus on Facebook
The LTT Store
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FH5SoaRx2TA
Direct YouTube Link - There's a Secret (Better) Netflix for Millionaires
Linus on Facebook
The LTT Store
0 Replies
·
7 views
TWiT Tech Podcast Network
Time for another AWESOME video from the TWIT Network!
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4qHlGE3NrU
Direct YouTube Link - How AI Is Changing Developer Life
TWIT's Website
TWIT Live Feed
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4qHlGE3NrU
Direct YouTube Link - How AI Is Changing Developer Life
TWIT's Website
TWIT Live Feed
0 Replies
·
6 views