John McCain Wants Pay Channels Sold Individually, Not In Bundles

[riffjim4069]

I read most but not all posts, not sure it was pointed out, the title is wrong. I can't find where Mccain or anyone said programs can't be sold in bundles as the title suggests...

Good point. I'm not against bundled programming and, in fact, the model probably makes better sense for most viewers. Likewise, a la cart each and every channel may not be practical, although I doubt if you had seen my recent hospital bill where they can practically track, and bill for, every breath I took during my stay (labeled as a living assistance fee ). However, people should have far greater ability to select their programmings packages. For example, Shaw Direct (Canada) customers are given a much greater flexibility when selecting their programming package and bundles. Our current system sucks.

 

[harshness]

would kill some channels don't you think ?

There are a number of channels that need to die. Most of what the MTV networks offer comes to mind and there has to be some limit to what the ESPNs show absent undisputed sports programming.

 

[harshness]

Good point. I'm not against bundled programming and, in fact, the model probably makes better sense for most viewers.

The trick here is that the programmers know this and they spread their programming across as many channels as they can to force us to subscribe to them all anyway.

 

[riffjim4069]

The trick here is that the programmers know this and they spread their programming across as many channels as they can to force us to subscribe to them all anyway.

Yep, I can see AMC moving one of two of their more popular shows, like Mad Men or The Walking Dead, over to IFC should a la carte happen. The fights would get ugly, which is probably why nobody has wanted to battle the programmers....until now. People are getting fed-up of working-harder and earning less, only to have the programming jacking-up rates and seeing them pull-in record profits.

 

[dishcomm]

if that is true don't be wishy washy on this issue either. look at what you are saying for a few dollars YOU are selling out your principles. hoping for a few $ really
the BO issues are stupid but i would not sell out my principles to lift them.

One must look at who is less principled before blindly standing on principle. Or, more clearly stated, is your battle to remain 'pure' on no government intervention worth losing the war?
For example....I once held a real estate appraiser's license which I earned through hundreds of hours of classroom time and an extensive three hour exam.
During the course of the classes, the instructors discussed the reason for licensure requirements. It was due to the S&L crisis of the 1980's. Back then there were people who without formal training that lenders were employing to appraise property and offer an opinion of value. The problem was the lenders were over valuing property to sell loans. The appraisers just did what they were told. So lenders inflated values, wrote loans on land or structures at those numbers. The whole thing collapsed mainly on a collapsing crude oil market and other factors. The bottom line is the appraisal business failed to police itself. Government stepped in and regulated the entire business.
Fast forward to today. The TV producers have allowed or caused the price for their services to far outweigh the value to the customer. No one wants to be forced to buy something they do not want just because the vendor wishes to exist in a costly business model. This is an example of an industry which fails to police itself.
At that point the consumer would necessarily look to government for relief.

 

[madmadworld]

For example....I once held a real estate appraiser's license which I earned through hundreds of hours of classroom time and an extensive three hour exam.
During the course of the classes, the instructors discussed the reason for licensure requirements. It was due to the S&L crisis of the 1980's. Back then there were people who without formal training that lenders were employing to appraise property and offer an opinion of value. The problem was the lenders were over valuing property to sell loans. The appraisers just did what they were told. So lenders inflated values, wrote loans on land or structures at those numbers. The whole thing collapsed mainly on a collapsing crude oil market and other factors. The bottom line is the appraisal business failed to police itself. Government stepped in and regulated the entire business.

i also am old
Fast forward to today.
how did that work out ?
on that subject what they failed to do then and today is rid of us of those dumb butt flexible interest rates that in part got us to today.

government intervention worth losing the war?

This is an example of an industry which fails to police itself.
At that point the consumer would necessarily look to government for relief.

this is not war.
government for relief: just stop pay for it if you don't like it simple.myself don't want my tax dollars wasted on this bs. we have troubles in this country this and this is not one of them. looking for gov for answer to a cable bill please.
there are over 600,000 homeless people in this country let them(gov) work on that first.

 

[dishcomm]

i also am old
Fast forward to today.
how did that work out ?
on that subject what they failed to do then and today is rid of us of those dumb butt flexible interest rates that in part got us to today.

this is not war.
government for relief: just stop pay for it if you don't like it simple.myself don't want my tax dollars wasted on this bs. we have troubles in this country this and this is not one of them. looking for gov for answer to a cable bill please.
there are over 600,000 homeless people in this country let them(gov) work on that first.

Interest rates have ZERO to do with obtaining opinion of value.
Ok...I am not going to get into a political discussion ( not permitted in this forum) on unrelated issues.
I used an example of what government does in the interest of the people when an industry cannot or will not act in the public interest.
Oh yeah, I am going to tell you this just once. DO NOT edit my posts.
If you are going to quote another poster, then use the ENTIRE quote. Otherwise, do not use any.
I hope I have made myself clear.
Your response should be either "no" or "crystal"

 

[Kraven]

SO McCain wants A-LA-Carte eh? Allow me to speculate:

With his political career winding down and ol' John is spending more time at home and more time on the couch watching TV. He then suddenly realizes, "holy cow am paying for a lot of channels that i dont want!"

 

[dishcomm]

SO McCain wants A-LA-Carte eh? Allow me to speculate:

With his political career winding down and ol' John is spending more time at home and more time on the couch watching TV. He then suddenly realizes, "holy cow am paying for a lot of channels that i dont want!"

LOL!!!!!

 

[TheTechGuru]

SO McCain wants A-LA-Carte eh? Allow me to speculate:

With his political career winding down and ol' John is spending more time at home and more time on the couch watching TV. He then suddenly realizes, "holy cow am paying for a lot of channels that i dont want!"

He probably wants just FoxNews and Pursuit.

 

[dishcomm]

He probably wants just FoxNews and Pursuit.

I do not think Mc Cain is a big fan of FNC.
Anyway, A la carte is an idea which absolutely needs to be explored.

 

[TheTechGuru]

I do not think Mc Cain is a big fan of FNC.
Anyway, A la carte is an idea which absolutely needs to be explored.

I was always told republicans watch FNC and democrats watch CNN...

I find FNC to be almost as bad as the 700 club.

 

[harshness]

Anyway, A la carte is an idea which absolutely needs to be explored.

Charlie Ergen has been testifying on behalf of a la carte for many years. The only help he seems to get is from John Malone.

I suspect that if it is going to happen, most of the other players (Comcast, DIRECTV, TWC, Cox, Brighthouse) are going to have to do a whole lot more than they are now. Until then, adopting a la carte will be on a par with eliminating government waste in terms of congressional support.

 

[TNGTony]

I have to bring this up in each of these a la carte threads for the benefit of those that weren't around when Dish used to have that option. Way back when, Dish offered "Dish Pix" You could pick 10 channel for $15. With the exception of Viacom and Disney channels, one could choose any 10 channels they wanted for the $15/mo. Viacom and Disney would never play ball. At the time Disney was transitioning from a premium channel to a basic channel so even Disney was available a la carte for $9.95/mo,

Dish Pix was slowly squeezed out of existence by the content providers.

 

[dishcomm]

I was always told republicans watch FNC and democrats watch CNN...

I find FNC to be almost as bad as the 700 club.

So what? Your point?
And what on Earth does this have to do with a la carte programming?

 

[TheTechGuru]

So what? Your point?
And what on Earth does this have to do with a la carte programming?

It has to do with McCain and his way of thinking and has a lot more to do with a la carte programming than your reply.

 

[dishcomm]

It has to do with McCain and his way of thinking and has a lot more to do with a la carte programming than your reply.

That is YOUR opinion.
You don't care for a la carte. Fine.
I want the choice. That's that.

 

[madmadworld]

McCain's A La Carte Cable Will Make Content Creators Richer
http://beta.fool.com/valuemagnet/20...-carte-cable-will-make-content-creator/34302/

A La Carte Cable, Coming Soon? Dream On, Says Dish Network CEO
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffber...e-coming-soon-dream-on-says-dish-network-ceo/
I think we’re going to get to a point at some place in time where we have pushed to consumer to two, three hundred dollars a month for programming. They’re not going to accept that, nor can they afford it. Then the industry will say “Oh my gosh,” and we’ll have to pull back and look at the model. When that is, I do not know

Your Cable Bill’s Going Up Again, But Forget a la Carte Pricing
http://go.bloomberg.com/tech-blog/2...going-up-again-but-forget-a-la-carte-pricing/

À La Carte Won’t Fix Cable
http://www.slate.com/articles/busin...rte_cable_bill_is_bad_deal_for_consumers.html

 

[dishcomm]

McCain's A La Carte Cable Will Make Content Creators Richer
http://beta.fool.com/valuemagnet/20...-carte-cable-will-make-content-creator/34302/

A La Carte Cable, Coming Soon? Dream On, Says Dish Network CEO
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffber...e-coming-soon-dream-on-says-dish-network-ceo/
I think we’re going to get to a point at some place in time where we have pushed to consumer to two, three hundred dollars a month for programming. They’re not going to accept that, nor can they afford it. Then the industry will say “Oh my gosh,” and we’ll have to pull back and look at the model. When that is, I do not know

Your Cable Bill’s Going Up Again, But Forget a la Carte Pricing
http://go.bloomberg.com/tech-blog/2...going-up-again-but-forget-a-la-carte-pricing/

À La Carte Won’t Fix Cable
http://www.slate.com/articles/busin...rte_cable_bill_is_bad_deal_for_consumers.html

Assuming each opinion piece is repetitious, I chose the Bloomberg story.
I will state the theory evoked in that writer's opinion is backwards thinking.
He states that fewer viewers( lower demand) will cause a price INCREASE.
Most people know the laws of supply and demand. Yes ESPN's costs may be fixed due to contracts already in place, but that is not the problem of the viewers.
I think customer's tolerance for pay tv rates is about to reach the end of its rope.
The programmers appear to be in a feeding frenzy. Most sports programmers have taken 'stupid pills'. It seems the pro leagues and the NCAA just have to snap their fingers and VIOLA....They get top dollar for their events.
That cannot continue forever. Case and point. D* was $300 just two seasons back. Now, new customers can get it free with a certain level of programming. AND NFL ST is $200.
When I was a tech, one of the most common complaints was about bundling. "Why do I have to have all these channels? I never watch them"...

 

[mike123abc]

The flaw in those articles is that they show ESPN would have to skyrocket in rates, and so would "other" channels. The point they fail to make is if a lot of these "other" channels quadrupled their rates they would be under $1/month and many under 50 cents a month.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/141097593.html

Only ESPN, 3net and TNT charge more than $1. If we assume 5x all rates if a la carte, ESPN $25, #4 Disney $5, and it quickly drops down from there.