Ala Carte programming

[pdiddy]

Just for my own knowledge,I'll like to know how many people would like ala carte programming?I'm one who would like to make my own package.We all get stuck with a package,of which 90% of it we don"t watch.For rural customers like myself,you have to stores to by from.Direct or Dish,period.They both will tell you,you can't buy and pay for what you want to watch,you must buy their package.Think about going to the grocery store and wanting to buy milk,eggs and bread.And then they tell you,you can only buy those items if you buy meat,fruit and 20 other items.It's the same idea,if you look at it like that.It's not right,and needs to stop.Just saying.

 

[harshness]

I'd bet that a substantial majority don't want to deal with it.

The insurmountable problem with a la carte is that picking a channel no longer gets you what you thought it was going to bring. History is perhaps the best example. Most of the interesting program is on H2 while the original channel is substantially crap TV. Most of the MTV channels don't offer much in the way of music (Palladia being a notable exception). The cooking channels are more about reality TV and other filler rather than delivering cooking ideas, tips and recipes.

Then there's the elephant in the living room that is Disney.

 

[raoul5788]

This is a topic that has been discussed in depth. Bottom line, if you only paid for what you want to watch, it's likely to cost you about the same as it does now.

 

[andreab@DISH Network]

I apologize that we do not have that option. Most places you go have packages already put together. Placement and package requirements are based on the contracts we have with the channel owners. I can definetly put in a request for you that this be an option but I cannot guarantee that it will be.

 

[pdiddy]

raoul

This is a topic that has been discussed in depth. Bottom line, if you only paid for what you want to watch, it's likely to cost you about the same as it does now.

Raoul,your statement doesn't make sense,if 200 hundred channels are on say a basic package for lets say $39.95,why in the world would 10 cable news channels cost about the same price?If I want ten news channels and that's it,the price should reflect 10 channels,vs 200 channels.It's really a no brainer.Your not an employee of direct,are you?

 

[boba]

raoul

Raoul,your statement doesn't make sense,if 200 hundred channels are on say a basic package for lets say $39.95,why in the world would 10 cable news channels cost about the same price?If I want ten news channels and that's it,the price should reflect 10 channels,vs 200 channels.It's really a no brainer.Your not an employee of direct,are you?

PLEASE TRY SEARCHING FOR THIS TOPIC There have been so many threads on this topic and they go no place. Moderator please close this thread before it become 100 pages of garbage.

 

[Radioguy41]

C-band was ala-carte. It was easy, inexpensive, and worked just fine. The notion that ala-carte will cost as much or more than what is available now just doesn't hold water. You can bet the farm, though, that a significant number of (garbage) channels would disappear. I suspect there would be an upward nudge in quality as well as long term network viability would switch back to pleasing the end user as opposed to cable and satellite providers.

 

[pdiddy]

C-band was ala-carte. It was easy, inexpensive, and worked just fine. The notion that ala-carte will cost as much or more than what is available now just doesn't hold water. You can bet the farm, though, that a significant number of (garbage) channels would disappear. I suspect there would be an upward nudge in quality as well as long term network viability would switch back to pleasing the end user as opposed to cable and satellite providers.

 

[osu1991]

Many channels would go up in price in order to survive on their own without getting bundled package money from millions of people that never watch them. Many would go away which is not a bad thing.

As in the other threads, I've said before I grow tired of looking at the guide and seeing 100 channels with an all day marathon of something or with 4hrs of programming on a repeated loop all day long, just so the media ownership can sell more commercial time and squeeze a few more pennies out of millions of subscribers that never watch. I would rather pay $40 for 10 channels I want to watch than pay $40 for a 100 channels that may only have 4 or 5 channels I want to watch.

 

[directv newb]

One argument against ala carte programming that I have always agreed with and DO NOT see an answer to is this, how would new channels ever get off the ground. Just for an example take Bravo channel. If I had my personal pick of channels and I was 'fat and happy" with them and along comes this channel called "Bravo" I WOULD NEVER get off my fat ass and add that channel to my "ala carte" package. (Now I love Bravo channel). My point being it would be very difficult if not impossible for a new channel to start up once people were settled in with their "ala carte" package. I am actually not against picking your own channel package, this is just an argument that I have heard against it and I don't see an answer to it.

 

[raoul5788]

Let's keep to the topic and not discuss other posters. Thanks.

 

[Jimbo]

Just for my own knowledge,I'll like to know how many people would like ala carte programming?I'm one who would like to make my own package.We all get stuck with a package,of which 90% of it we don"t watch.For rural customers like myself,you have to stores to by from.Direct or Dish,period.They both will tell you,you can't buy and pay for what you want to watch,you must buy their package.Think about going to the grocery store and wanting to buy milk,eggs and bread.And then they tell you,you can only buy those items if you buy meat,fruit and 20 other items.It's the same idea,if you look at it like that.It's not right,and needs to stop.Just saying.

You can't AFFORD a package of channels you want, if you were to get them specifically ...

Btw, you use to be able to do that with some C-Band providers, I know I did, but that was late 80s.

 

[Jimbo]

This is a topic that has been discussed in depth. Bottom line, if you only paid for what you want to watch, it's likely to cost you about the same as it does now.

Or more ...

Yes, this has been discussed till it's death ... over the years.

I'd love to make a package consisting of channels I watch, but I'm 1000% sure it would cost me more than I pay now.

Also, it would really suck when I saw a show that I would like to take a look at and notice that it's not a channel I have chose.

 

[Jimbo]

C-band was ala-carte. It was easy, inexpensive, and worked just fine. The notion that ala-carte will cost as much or more than what is available now just doesn't hold water. You can bet the farm, though, that a significant number of (garbage) channels would disappear. I suspect there would be an upward nudge in quality as well as long term network viability would switch back to pleasing the end user as opposed to cable and satellite providers.

And if you look at the Sat C-Band proividers that were out there back in the day vs NOW, you'll see why Ala Catrte doesn't work that well .

How many are left now, 2 ?
I haven't looked at C-Band in years, but I know providers were dwindling when I jumped out.

I was able to get a nice package thru TurnerVision for many years, it was great, it cost me about $ 600 a year and that included the Sunday Ticket for $ 79 a year as well as the ability to have the Denver or west coast locals ...

Yes, I enjoyed it, but it also got expensive when technologies changed and you had to start over with new equipment, no the Channel provider didn't provide new recvrs or any service calls.

 

[pdiddy]

I agree with jeep guy.

 

[Jimbo]

One argument against ala carte programming that I have always agreed with and DO NOT see an answer to is this, how would new channels ever get off the ground. Just for an example take Bravo channel. If I had my personal pick of channels and I was 'fat and happy" with them and along comes this channel called "Bravo" I WOULD NEVER get off my fat ass and add that channel to my "ala carte" package. (Now I love Bravo channel). My point being it would be very difficult if not impossible for a new channel to start up once people were settled in with their "ala carte" package. I am actually not against picking your own channel package, this is just an argument that I have heard against it and I don't see an answer to it.

Probably what would happen would be that the New Channel would show up FTA in your guide and be on for free for a set amount of time, then after that time frame, it would be encrypted and you would have to pay for it if you wanted it.

 

[Jimbo]

I agree with jeep guy.

Some how we knew that ...

So, if you want ESPN, your good paying about say $100 per year for it, right, now lets add a few more channels, Locals use to cost about say $ 75, now you have to have your own local, not someone elses, it's just the way it goes this day and age.

Ok, add History channel, that would be say, maybe $30- 40
Turner channels, say another $50-60

By the time you get your channels accounted for your at or past your money currently spent ...

Yes, back in the day C-Band channels were cheap, but like I said, the equipment was not and a service call didn't come from the Channel provider.

 

[pdiddy]

Many channels would go up in price in order to survive on their own without getting bundled package money from millions of people that never watch them. Many would go away which is not a bad thing.

As in the other threads, I've said before I grow tired of looking at the guide and seeing 100 channels with an all day marathon of something or with 4hrs of programming on a repeated loop all day long, just so the media ownership can sell more commercial time and squeeze a few more pennies out of millions of subscribers that never watch. I would rather pay $40 for 10 channels I want to watch than pay $40 for a 100 channels that may only have 4 or 5 channels I want to watch.

I agree with you,how about this,what's the deal with having a 2 year contract?When you get your land line telephone and power turned on there is no contract never has been.Now sat tv and cell phones want a COMMITMENT.You got two people to choose from,give us a commitment or you don't get service.Things need to change big time with both dish and direct.You play by their rules it's a monopoly thing.The phone company was the same way years ago til the government broke em up.We need to all contact our senators and force sat tv to have no commitment and have ala carte programming.It not like you can go some where else,when you live in a rural area.

 

[Jimbo]

I agree with you,how about this,what's the deal with having a 2 year contract?When you get your land line telephone and power turned on there is no contract never has been.Now sat tv and cell phones want a COMMITMENT.You got two people to choose from,give us a commitment or you don't get service.Things need to change big time with both dish and direct.You play by their rules it's a monopoly thing.The phone company was the same way years ago til the government broke em up.We need to all contact our senators and force sat tv to have no commitment and have ala carte programming.It not like you can go some where else,when you live in a rural area.

I think the Cell phone companies started this and others have followed along.

Thgere was NO Commitment back when att was broke up, never has been, before or after.
However, you will get the best prices if you do go with a commitment.

The Cell phone companies feel they need commitments so it covers the cost of the (OVERLY PRICED) cell phone. Any one that actually thinks they have $600 in thier cell phone is nuts.

I once paid like $800 for a HD Directv recvr (what was I thinking ?) that was before the Lease program.

 

[pdiddy]

I think the Cell phone companies started this and others have followed along.

Thgere was NO Commitment back when att was broke up, never has been, before or after.
However, you will get the best prices if you do go with a commitment.

The Cell phone companies feel they need commitments so it covers the cost of the (OVERLY PRICED) cell phone. Any one that actually thinks they have $600 in thier cell phone is nuts.

I once paid like $800 for a HD Directv recvr (what was I thinking ?) that was before the Lease program.

It's a marketing thing,these guys have meetings and think this all out,how to get the most out of the customers.But think of how much money it cost a month these days.Add it up cell phone,landline,internet,sat tv,or cable.No wonder people are living check to check.You get use to this stuff then it's hard to get rid of it.My first direct tv set up was $600 bucks in 1991.Thought it was cheap,but you pay for it now with all the endless commercials,and I mean endless as you well know.
.