Maine’s Cable A La Carte Law Challenged (1 Viewer)

Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!
Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!

Claude Greiner

SatelliteGuys Master
Supporting Founder
Sep 8, 2003
13,225
3,769
Detroit - The Paris of the Midwest
A la carte is NOT the answer.

The problem you would have is people taking a lower tier package and then adding that one channel from the higher tier package.

Streaming has already hurt the cable industry already, the last thing they need is for people to go to streaming and buy from the cable company what they can’t get online.

If the politicians want to start somewhere, let’s start with the ability to remove locals, and sports channels from base programming packages.

Just getting rid of locals, and sports could cut a customers bill easily by $20/mo
 

navychop

Member of the Month - July 2014!
Pub Member / Supporter
Lifetime Supporter
Jul 20, 2005
52,284
17,262
Northern VA
I can't see how this law could take effect. The cablecos still must buy groups of channels to resell. Is Maine going to order ATT, Disney etc to sell to the cablecos a la Carte?

Maybe they should pass a law setting Pi equal to three.


Sent from my iPad3 using the SatelliteGuys app! Only because can't get Tapatalk to work on such an old device. I'll shift to Chrome on this, too, eventually.
 

SamCdbs

SatelliteGuys Pro
Lifetime Supporter
May 7, 2008
1,735
467
ALC is about the most anti-consumer idea ever. The end result is a complete cable line up of maybe 30 channels, all of them much more broad than currently (think USA Network c. 1990).
 
Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!

Howard Simmons

SatelliteGuys Pro
Lifetime Supporter
Jun 25, 2018
2,167
1,773
Northwest Florida
A la carte is NOT the answer.

The problem you would have is people taking a lower tier package and then adding that one channel from the higher tier package.

Streaming has already hurt the cable industry already, the last thing they need is for people to go to streaming and buy from the cable company what they can’t get online.

If the politicians want to start somewhere, let’s start with the ability to remove locals, and sports channels from base programming packages.

Just getting rid of locals, and sports could cut a customers bill easily by $20/mo
You must think everyone can get their local channels OTA. That's not the case in a lot of places, mine being one.
 

osu1991

SatelliteGuys Master
Sep 4, 2004
9,905
2,340
Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
You must think everyone can get their local channels OTA. That's not the case in a lot of places, mine being one.

That's not what he said. He said locals and sports should be removed from the base bundles and made optional. If you need them, then pay for then, if you don't then don't pay for them and get them OTA. Locals and sports are what are driving the prices higher and only a small percentage of viewers actually need locals from the MVPD or watch sports.

Dish is leading the way on this front, making locals an optional add on. More providers need to follow this. I don't need to pay Cox $10 for locals and $4 for RSN's that I get just fine for free OTA and RSN's that I never watch, but I have no choice but to pay for them if I want any other subscription programming through Cox. Even more annoying is it is a below the line item for locals and the RSN's so they are an additional cost above the bundle programming price, yet I can't opt to not subscribe to them. :mad:
 
  • Like
Reactions: harshness

osu1991

SatelliteGuys Master
Sep 4, 2004
9,905
2,340
Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
Maine Challenges Court's Blocking of A La Carte Law


The judge granted a temporary injunction, saying Comcast et al. had made a good case that the law violates the First Amendment’s prohibition on speaker-based regulations, since the law did not apply to satellite or other MVPDs, but also suggested that cable pricing could be a reason for treating cable differently when it comes to unbundling.

said Attorney General Frey, "this issue merits appellate review. We continue to contend that the First Amendment does not give cable companies the right, as a business decision, to force customers to buy dozens of channels they don’t want just to get the two or three they actually watch. The First Amendment is about protecting freedom of expression, not protecting business strategies that harm consumers.”
 
Register Today to see less ads! It's Free!

Users who are viewing this thread

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Latest posts

Top