HIGHER PRICES COMING PEOPLE

[mike123abc]

What it really comes down to is a few program packs costing the real money. ESPN is an example. Most channels range from free to 10 cents. If the low cost channels were bundled into a $5 group pack or $1 each, most would pick the $5 pack, especially if it had 30+ channels in it.

The low cost niche channels would be picked up by most people.

It is the large conglomerates like Disney with ESPN, the Discovery Group, Scripps, etc that want to force carriage at a high rate.

 

[cappy29]

Prices.

The consumer is the only one that can put a stop to this nonsense. Stop buying the product at inflated prices and then the price will come down.

+2 It's pretty much like that with everything if people are willing to keep paying it they will keep raising it!!

 

[Greg Bimson]

What it really comes down to is a few program packs costing the real money. ESPN is an example. Most channels range from free to 10 cents. If the low cost channels were bundled into a $5 group pack or $1 each, most would pick the $5 pack, especially if it had 30+ channels in it.

The low cost niche channels would be picked up by most people.

It is the large conglomerates like Disney with ESPN, the Discovery Group, Scripps, etc that want to force carriage at a high rate.

But now you are getting into dangerous territory that diverges from reality...

The complaint is that current package pricing is too high, and that a la carte is the answer. Now this suggest a complete revamping of packages. Who determines which channels go in which package?

From the looks of this post, channels are to be segregated into packages by cost. That makes no sense, as the current method of packaging appears to work for the programmers, the distributors and the consumers. If it wasn't working, something would have been done about it already.

I dare say it again: some people are so keen on dumping specific channels thinking it will lower their bill that some assumptions made simply skew reality. Case in point:

If the low cost channels were bundled into a $5 group pack or $1 each, most would pick the $5 pack, especially if it had 30+ channels in it.

The low cost niche channels would be picked up by most people.

Once again, it depends upon the channels that are in this $5 pack. And no one has stated that I'd get TV for $5 a month simply by having this pack. I'd think Dish Network would have a problem if consumers that have been paying almost $40 for AT120 dropped to a $5 a month pack.

 

[Greg Bimson]

Dish would be happy to reduce our bills, if they were able to reduce their outlays by an even greater amount. If they didn't have to pay the big bucks to ESPN for me, they would be willing to pass along some of the savings.

Speaking of assumptions...

I've never seen a company happy to reduce their own revenue. They have revenue targets to hit, to please their shareholders. A company could reduce the revenue they generate if it is in definite lock-step with a larger reduction is costs. However, notice I said could.

Why pass savings to the customer when it will cost quite a bit to update systems to accomodate some version of a la carte? That's why revenues and expenditures are not lock-step with each other.

 

[ekilgus]

But now you are getting into dangerous territory that diverges from reality...

The complaint is that current package pricing is too high, and that a la carte is the answer. Now this suggest a complete revamping of packages. Who determines which channels go in which package?

From the looks of this post, channels are to be segregated into packages by cost. That makes no sense, as the current method of packaging appears to work for the programmers, the distributors and the consumers. If it wasn't working, something would have been done about it already.

I dare say it again: some people are so keen on dumping specific channels thinking it will lower their bill that some assumptions made simply skew reality. Case in point:Once again, it depends upon the channels that are in this $5 pack. And no one has stated that I'd get TV for $5 a month simply by having this pack. I'd think Dish Network would have a problem if consumers that have been paying almost $40 for AT120 dropped to a $5 a month pack.

With true Ala carte there would be no packages. The consumer would simply be provided with a list of all available channels and their respective cost so they could select what channels they want from that list.
The selection process would contain a form of groupings that programming provides. For example, if you would select HBO, you would get all the HBO channels for the price listed.
People could log on to their dish accounts and select/unselect programming without the need to contact customer service. This could be almost completely automated. There would be rules preventing people from selecting a channel just to watch a particular event and unselecting it the next day, probably by stating if you selected a channel you couldn't unselect it for a period of time, maybe a couple of months or so. Without packages, if a programmer raises the fee for a particular channel dramatically, people would have the option to drop it without affecting their other selected programming.

 

[Greg Bimson]

With true Ala carte there would be no packages. The consumer would simply be provided with a list of all available channels and their respective cost so they could select what channels they want from that list.
The selection process would contain a form of groupings that programming provides. For example, if you would select HBO, you would get all the HBO channels for the price listed.

But isn't that itself "mini-packages"?

Without packages, if a programmer raises the fee for a particular channel dramatically, people would have the option to drop it without affecting their other selected programming.

Again, more assumptions...

How would the cabler or satellite distributor make any money?

 

[MikeD-C05]

In Canada the sat companies allow ala carte but it is in packs. You can bundle the sports pack and the family pack and the variety pack etc. You can add what pack you want and discard the ones you don't. IF you didn't want sports you don't add it.

 

[Greg Bimson]

In Canada the sat companies allow ala carte but it is in packs. You can bundle the sports pack and the family pack and the variety pack etc. You can add what pack you want and discard the ones you don't. IF you didn't want sports you don't add it.

Each of these packs have to have a certain amount of Canadian content. The government controls were channels are placed into packages (see Fox News in Canada)

It wasn't until 2008 when the CRTC finally deregulated (to an extent) the pay-TV industry. The government in Canada has their hands all over the broadcasters.

I'd suspect if that's the definition of free-market (which it isn't), then go for it. Let's raise taxes to create this uber-FCC which will review changes to all packages.

Let's face it. Someone in this thread told me "It's only TV". Well, it's driven by "money", like everything else. And trying to find a solution where the pay-TV distributors receive less of your money will ultimately do two things: make broadcasters less profitable (if they are now) in turn creating job loss, and then make the programmers and broadcasters find alternative ways to make that money back and then some.

Which kills me that the one main proposal here is to have the government do something. They couldn't even get anything to fix healthcare (where costs are up even worse), yet it is expected the government needs to do something about pay-TV?

 

[ramimac]

If alacart went into existence. I would see it working like this.

as the providor all you do is provide the means of broadcasting the channels.

Charge say a $10 access fee to the customer plus equipment rentals..

Then the channel owners would contract with the providors how much they will have to pay per channel for them to host is for them..

Meanwile the billing will all be though the Providor...

As I remember with old C-band days the channel owners would sell you not one channel but there pack like dicovery or showtime.. I could be wrong but you did not just purchase just the one channel.

Those would be considered channel packs if you would that you could subscribe to from the providers.. nothing which would cause software upgrades by dish or direct..


As the provider you are noe making money for every channel plus a small per subscriber fee to the package, along with the $10 access fee, plus the equipment..

What i believe would be a win win for all, because now the channel owner would have to have proramming that would entise custermers to want there channels.

obviously the channels that have more subscribers could fetch a higher price..


and all of this would take the burden off the of channel provider.

 

[dvrexpander]

I'd love to see a package the customer can build.... I only watch a few certain channels on my 200+ channel package. I have no choice but to suck it up and get this to watch these certain channels. If I could only sub to say ESPN channels, E, AMC, locals, Weather channel, movie channels like HBO/Starz and I think those other few movie channels I could care less about the rest...but that won't happen.

I'll be honest too I think HBO and Starz charge too much for watching the same stuff over and over each month.

ps - I'd love to see ESPNU HD soon!

 

[chicagonettech]

As I understand it, Charlie would love to see ala carte programming. The main advantage of ala carte programming would be the fact that most of the home shopping channels would quickly disappear - perfectly all right with me.

In fact, in as much as we are more of a movie household - no sports whatsoever, I'd be glad to reduce my monthly haul by $4.50 per month to get rid of ESPN and all of the other forced-down-our throat channels.

We do an annual budget - reviewed quarterly. 25% of everything we bring in goes towards our retirement - no, not into the stock market - and we have no bills except the mortgage. We're in the process of reviewing our budget for the 2nd quarter of 2010, and that will decide for us, once we see the newest bill and the "good customer discounts" what we keep and what we get rid of with DN.

 

[Sileny Jizda]

We've already grown tired of the greed. After the NHL Center Ice package is up we're shipping everything back to Dish and using the OTA antenna we have. We don't' watch that much tv anymore because the programming is lacking. I can think of better ways to spend our $66 a month ($39 according to the latest lying Dish commercial). They can hose someone else as far as I'm concerned.

 

[mike123abc]

I dare say it again: some people are so keen on dumping specific channels thinking it will lower their bill that some assumptions made simply skew reality. Case in point:Once again, it depends upon the channels that are in this $5 pack. And no one has stated that I'd get TV for $5 a month simply by having this pack. I'd think Dish Network would have a problem if consumers that have been paying almost $40 for AT120 dropped to a $5 a month pack.

Dish has this package. It is Dish family. Dish is essentially charging $15/month for the account/equipment. Then selling $5 in programming. $10 if you have the locals added too.

AT120 does not have the RSN, it costs you $5 to get the RSN.

I know these examples are limited because a la carte does not exist. But, they illustrate that Dish can make money on a $20-24/month customer.

 

[mike123abc]

As I understand it, Charlie would love to see ala carte programming. The main advantage of ala carte programming would be the fact that most of the home shopping channels would quickly disappear - perfectly all right with me.

All the shopping channels would still be there. They pay the provider to provide them.

The big winners would probably be HBO and SHO since more people would probably subscribe if they save a lot of money elsewhere in their bill.

 

[branchbouncer]

All the shopping channels would still be there. They pay the provider to provide them.

The big winners would probably be HBO and SHO since more people would probably subscribe if they save a lot of money elsewhere in their bill.

We adjusted our package with E* last night, talked to the kids what they liked to watch the most, was ready to go either way, Family pak with all the HBO, SHO and such, Americas Everthing. Asked what to get rid of they said the movie channels, this is coming from our youngest 11 and 12. They said "It's always the same thing-over,and over".

 

[Charade]

We only have ourselves to blame.

 

[Greg Bimson]

I'd think Dish Network would have a problem if consumers that have been paying almost $40 for AT120 dropped to a $5 a month pack.

Dish has this package. It is Dish family. Dish is essentially charging $15/month for the account/equipment. Then selling $5 in programming. $10 if you have the locals added too.

And it's so popular it's overtaken AT120.

It shows how much Dish Network doesn't even advertise Family Pack...

 

[Stargazer]

All the shopping channels would still be there. They pay the provider to provide them.

The big winners would probably be HBO and SHO since more people would probably subscribe if they save a lot of money elsewhere in their bill.

If the other stations raise their prices due to low subscription rates while movie packages keep prices the same since they would have similar subscription rates then more people will be going with the movie packages. I do not see movie packages being affected greatly by this, only channels that are packaged in large packages. Movie packages are already offered ala carte in their own packages today.

 

[jsq]

I'd love to see a package the customer can build.... I only watch a few certain channels on my 200+ channel package. I have no choice but to suck it up and get this to watch these certain channels. If I could only sub to say ESPN channels, E, AMC, locals, Weather channel, movie channels like HBO/Starz and I think those other few movie channels I could care less about the rest...but that won't happen.

I'll be honest too I think HBO and Starz charge too much for watching the same stuff over and over each month.

ps - I'd love to see ESPNU HD soon!

Dump HBO and Starz and get netflix. You get newer movies, and if you have a xbox 360, PS3, or a netflix streaming Blueray player, they have a lot of movies to choose from anytime you want to watch them. It's like HBO on demand, with a lot more movie choices. We did a few months back, and it is great.
The premium movie channels should be getting nervous, because once the netflix streaming thing becomes more mainstream, I see no reason to pay the prices that HBO, Starz, etc... are asking for the same old stuff.

 

[KAB]

Dump HBO and Starz and get netflix.

Cheaper yet, SD DVDs from Redbox. With good up conversion, as good or better than compressed Sat HD.