Comcast Rates going UP

[CubsWin]

I talked to one of my friends who has Comcast here in Chicago, and he said that he received a notification that the new rates go into effect here on Jan 1, 2022. RSN fee is up to $17.30 (up from $14.45, increase of $2.85) and the local channels is up to $19.75 (up from $16.20, increase of $3.55).

I just wish I could opt out of the locals on Comcast.

 

[Bruce]

I just wish I could opt out of the locals on Comcast.

One of the main reasons I left their Video Service years ago, they had just started charging the Broadcast and RSN fees, I called them up and said since they are charging extra they should let me opt out, especially since I had a antenna and did not watch the RSN, they said nope.

Did my research, found out about Playstation Vue, the next day called them up and canceled, because of Comcast doing those sneaky charges, it started me on my Cord Cutting Journey.

 

[John2021]

I remember in the early 90s when my family moved into town and we finally got cable it was $30 a month for everything except premium channels. That broadcast channel fee plus the RSN fee is $30

i remeber when DTV was 29.99 for 150 channels with no taxes and fee's . i forgot how much ussb was just for the rest of the basic cable channels

 

[Mr Tony]

i forgot how much ussb was just for the rest of the basic cable channels

7.95 which was the Viacom networks

 

[zippyfrog]

Here in Chicago, Comcast raised the rates again. I look back at my December 2021 post where the RSN fee went up to $17.30 and local channels went up to $19.75.

Starting this week, the new RSN fee is $20.25 - even though there is no Chicago Sports Network (credits of $8.85 are still being applied). The local channels is going up to $29.10. In 3 years, the increase is almost $10.00 on just locals.

Makes Dish's $14.00 for locals nothing compared to Comcast.

 

[AZ.]

Here in Chicago, Comcast raised the rates again. I look back at my December 2021 post where the RSN fee went up to $17.30 and local channels went up to $19.75.

Starting this week, the new RSN fee is $20.25 - even though there is no Chicago Sports Network (credits of $8.85 are still being applied). The local channels is going up to $29.10. In 3 years, the increase is almost $10.00 on just locals.

Makes Dish's $14.00 for locals nothing compared to Comcast.

Just read that on the phone today, and they still dont have the new Chicago sports network on?

 

[zippyfrog]

Just read that on the phone today, and they still don't have the new Chicago sports network on?

Exactly. They don't have the new Chicago Sports Network.

 

[Bruce]

Here in Chicago, Comcast raised the rates again. I look back at my December 2021 post where the RSN fee went up to $17.30 and local channels went up to $19.75.

Starting this week, the new RSN fee is $20.25 - even though there is no Chicago Sports Network (credits of $8.85 are still being applied). The local channels is going up to $29.10. In 3 years, the increase is almost $10.00 on just locals.

It is now being reported the RSN and Broadcast fees, is going up for all Comcast Markets.

Makes Dish's $14.00 for locals nothing compared to Comcast.

Which, along the packages and other fees, that will go up sometime in 2025 ( Dish just had a bill increase a few months ago).

And folks here question me why I am so adamant about about streaming.

When you can get all the streaming services that have the majority of content that is on paid Live TV, plus movies, the streaming only content, including HBO and Showtime, no commercials, 4K, all for $70-80 a month, I am amazed that Cable/Satellite are not losing more then the 8 Million that left last year and will this year.

 

[zippyfrog]

It is now being reported the RSN and Broadcast fees, is going up for all Comcast Markets.

Which, along the packages and other fees, that will go up sometime in 2025 ( Dish just had a bill increase a few months ago).

And folks here question me why I am so adamant about about streaming.

When you can get all the streaming services that have the majority of content that is on paid Live TV, plus movies, the streaming only content, including HBO and Showtime, no commercials, 4K, all for $70-80 a month, I am amazed that Cable/Satellite are not losing more then the 8 Million that left last year and will this year.

I agree that cable/satellite can't continue this trend of prices going up. For most people, at least in my area, is the speed and data caps that AT&T has. We are a little more rural - limited to around 30 megs of old DSL. I am blessed that I have T-Mobile Internet - usually around 300-500 megs and no data caps - but only a handful of my neighbors have it. My area is maxed out for the T-Mobile subscriptions as right now the website says it isn't available at the various houses. (I haven't tried the AT&T and Verizon equivalents of T-Mobile Home Internet and can't comment on them)

The second and more minor thing for me is that everything I would want isn't in one of the current DTC options. When ESPN goes DTC next fall (I believe somewhere I heard August in time for College Football), depending on the price point, that could push me from satellite to streaming. I don't believe USA Network of Golf Channel are available DTC (I don't see it in my Peacock service) - and I like catching some of the sporting events there. But I am 95% college football/NFL, and then I enjoy catching golf in the spring/early summer.

 

[Bruce]

The second and more minor thing for me is that everything I would want isn't in one of the current DTC options. When ESPN goes DTC next fall (I believe somewhere I heard August in time for College Football), depending on the price point, that could push me from satellite to streaming. I don't believe USA Network of Golf Channel are available DTC (I don't see it in my Peacock service) - and I like catching some of the sporting events there. But I am 95% college football/NFL, and then I enjoy catching golf in the spring/early summer.

Golf is on Peacock, for example, the PGA Championship.

Watch Golf Streaming Live | Peacock

Stream men’s and women’s golf live on Peacock, plus get channels, documentaries, and live coverage of the PNC Championship, and more.

www.peacocktv.com

There is also a Live Channel with Golf on Peacock, called Golfpass

What is on USA anymore?

They (Universal) were developing new series’ for that channel, but seem to have changed their mind, for example, Suits LA was being made for the USA Channel, but changed their mind ( probably because Comcast is spinning off/getting rid of their Cable Channels) and are putting it on NBC instead.

The other new series in development, either on NBC or Peacock now.

 

[zippyfrog]

Golf is on Peacock, for example, the PGA Championship.

There is also a Live Channel with Golf on Peacock, called Golfpass

What is on USA anymore?

Thank you for this info - I knew some of the Golf is on Peacock - but I don't see a 24/7 stream of Golf Channel. The reason I asked about USA is for the early rounds of the majors that NBC has. Do you happen to know if The Open (The British Open) and the US Open is available on Peacock? This past year they were on USA. The other reason I asked about Golf Channel is being in Chicago, when some of the CBS tournaments go past the allotted time, the CBS channels in Eastern/Central time zone have to watch the conclusion on Golf Channel, whereas the west coast it stays on CBS.

 

[telstar_1]

Exactly. They don't have the new Chicago Sports Network.

Would presume they'll have it shortly if continuing to charge that kind of fee. I believe it's like a new startup RSN and actually broadcasting over-air pending contracts (or not) with providers.

My own opinion is that it's criminal to be charging more than to recoup nominal turnaround cost on broadcast locals as well as for those locals to receive a dime from anyone. Or at the least nowhere close to these kinds of charges. And NO mandated RSNs (& fee) to get nonsports channels. Again let alone at these kinds of rates.

 

[zippyfrog]

Would presume they'll have it shortly if continuing to charge that kind of fee. I believe it's like a new startup RSN and actually broadcasting over-air pending contracts (or not) with providers.

Yeah - being a Dish customer, I love that it is being broadcast OTA because Dish has not had RSN's in years. One of the articles I read shares the same thought you have - and I agree. If Comcast wasn't planning on carrying the new RSN, they would have changed their RSN fee back in October with no credits. Or, if they were unsure, they might have done credits for Oct/Nov/Dec, and with the price adjustments, they would have changed the RSN fee and stopped the credit. At this point with the credit still being applied makes it seem like they will come to a deal at some point and would rather just stop the credits and advertise a larger RSN fee now than need to have huge RSN fee increase if/when they add it.

 

[NYDutch]

Would presume they'll have it shortly if continuing to charge that kind of fee. I believe it's like a new startup RSN and actually broadcasting over-air pending contracts (or not) with providers.

My own opinion is that it's criminal to be charging more than to recoup nominal turnaround cost on broadcast locals as well as for those locals to receive a dime from anyone. Or at the least nowhere close to these kinds of charges. And NO mandated RSNs (& fee) to get nonsports channels. Again let alone at these kinds of rates.

I would like to see all locals on "must carry" with no fee or a minimal fee at best. As it is, the fees are negotiated, so they are what they are. We've all seen what happens when the stations hold all the cards though.

 

[Bruce]

I would like to see all locals on "must carry" with no fee or a minimal fee at best. As it is, the fees are negotiated, so they are what they are. We've all seen what happens when the stations hold all the cards though.

Since advertising revenue is down, by at least half, if the locals (networks) did not receive the per sub fees, they would be losing $$$ and probably no longer broadcasting.

Even last year, with a very expensive election (ads), they still made less then 2016 with so many ads placed on streaming services.

In 2019, $60 Billion was spent on advertising to air on Traditional Live TV (channels).

Now, it is split, $30 Billion on Streaming, $30B on Traditional.

It is expected to increase to $35 Billion on Streaming in 2025 or 2026, $25B on Traditional.

 

[harshness]

Do you happen to know if The Open (The British Open) and the US Open is available on Peacock?

So long as NBC is the negotiated network. This appears to be the case for the 2025 editions of The Open Championship and The US Open

 

[AZ.]

I would like to see all locals on "must carry" with no fee or a minimal fee at best. As it is, the fees are negotiated, so they are what they are. We've all seen what happens when the stations hold all the cards though.

For the most part what are there 6 corporations have bought up most of those locals....so they can hold hostage a hundred channels in 2 dozen markets?

 

[Bruce]

The news is finally out everywhere-

Comcast customers are bracing for another price increase, this time affecting their access to Regional Sports Networks (RSNs). The cable giant has announced plans to raise the monthly cost of RSNs by $1 to $2, impacting subscribers across various markets. This increase means some Comcast customers could see an extra $12 to $24 tacked onto their annual bills, depending on the number of RSNs they receive and the specific increase in their area.

Does not anyone understand these increases are pushing more subscribers away, specially a RSN charge of up to $24.

Subscribers are going to see that on their bill, go, we never watch that channel (only about 2-3% watch the RSNs). call up Comcast, say we do not watch that channel, can we take it off, Comcast will say nope, part of the package, subscribers will say, if it is part of that package, why does it cost extra, Comcast will say sorry, nothing we can do.

Then that subscriber is looking for a alternative to Comcast Cable TV.

It is wildly known, the most expensive services are the ones losing the most subscribers, DirecTV has lost over 14 Million, down to under 10 Million, Comcast over 10 Million, now has about 13M.

Yet, they are not willing to change their business practices.

Now streaming services have mostly become profitable ( except Peacock, AMC+), at the rate of losses (8 Million this year), Cable/Satellite, in 3-5 years, will not have enough subscribers to be profitable.

 

[telstar_1]

The news is finally out everywhere-

Comcast customers are bracing for another price increase, this time affecting their access to Regional Sports Networks (RSNs). The cable giant has announced plans to raise the monthly cost of RSNs by $1 to $2, impacting subscribers across various markets. This increase means some Comcast customers could see an extra $12 to $24 tacked onto their annual bills, depending on the number of RSNs they receive and the specific increase in their area.

Does not anyone understand these increases are pushing more subscribers away, specially a RSN charge of up to $24.

Subscribers are going to see that on their bill, go, we never watch that channel (only about 2-3% watch the RSNs). call up Comcast, say we do not watch that channel, can we take it off, Comcast will say nope, part of the package, subscribers will say, if it is part of that package, why does it cost extra, Comcast will say sorry, nothing we can do.

Then that subscriber is looking for a alternative to Comcast Cable TV.

It is wildly known, the most expensive services are the ones losing the most subscribers, DirecTV has lost over 14 Million, down to under 10 Million, Comcast over 10 Million, now has about 13M.

Yet, they are not willing to change their business practices.

Now streaming services have mostly become profitable ( except Peacock, AMC+), at the rate of losses (8 Million this year), Cable/Satellite, in 3-5 years, will not have enough subscribers to be profitable.

That's a thought I just had- with all these locals creating all these exorbitant costs (through holding providers hostage), sure they're getting this whole new stream of revenue the like of which they never did before, but could it be they're ending up pushing people away from the broadcast nets altogether, out of simple distaste? Or are they altogether indispensible?