1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Welcome to the new DBSTalk community platform. We have recently migrated to a community platform called Xenfono and hope you will find this change to your liking. There are some differences, but for the most part, if you just post and read, that will all be the same. If you have questions, please post them in the Forum Support area. Thanks!

Intel to Offer A La Cart?

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Programming' started by ssm06, Jan 2, 2013.

  1. Jan 2, 2013 #1 of 459
    ssm06

    ssm06 Cool Member

    20
    0
    Dec 15, 2005
  2. Jan 2, 2013 #2 of 459
    texasbrit

    texasbrit DIRECTV A-Team

    5,055
    84
    Aug 9, 2006
    Intel does not control whether a la carte is going to be available. The content providers package the channels to sell to the cable/sat companies and that is unlikely to change because intel want it to. Also as has been pointed out, a la carte might easily make the price of a single channel very high.
    Any of the cable/sat companies could offer a la carte if their channel providers would agree.

    The posted article points out some of these issues.
     
  3. Jan 2, 2013 #3 of 459
    dpeters11

    dpeters11 Hall Of Fame

    16,184
    483
    May 30, 2007
    Cincinnati
    We recently had someone that says they only want 5-6 channels from DirecTV. A la carte would probably work for them, but most people that want it would find it isn't a real money saver.
     
  4. Jan 2, 2013 #4 of 459
    pfp

    pfp Whatever

    1,559
    0
    Apr 28, 2009
    I hope they pull it off. I for one would be happy to have the option to pay for individual channels. I realize that the price for those channels might be seem high but then I would be able to decide if the content they provided was worth the cost.
     
  5. Jan 2, 2013 #5 of 459
    Hoosier205

    Hoosier205 New Member

    6,659
    14
    Sep 3, 2007
    It's also likely that the channels you want would no longer exist in an a la carte world.
     
  6. Jan 2, 2013 #6 of 459
    pfp

    pfp Whatever

    1,559
    0
    Apr 28, 2009
    I agree that many channels would go away and quite frankly many of them should. I also suspect that some good programming from the channels that disappear would return on the channels that are left.
     
  7. Jan 2, 2013 #7 of 459
    Satelliteracer

    Satelliteracer Hall Of Fame

    3,042
    37
    Dec 6, 2006
  8. Jan 2, 2013 #8 of 459
    Hoosier205

    Hoosier205 New Member

    6,659
    14
    Sep 3, 2007
    Revenues used for production would tank. It hasn't worked and it won't work. I have no idea why it even gets discussed. It defies logic.
     
  9. Jan 2, 2013 #9 of 459
    pfp

    pfp Whatever

    1,559
    0
    Apr 28, 2009
    I suspect they do have a steep uphill battle to deliver unbundled packages but I also find it unlikely that cable/telco companies will allow their TV revenue stream to be cut by a 3rd party through the use of their broadband service.
     
  10. Jan 2, 2013 #10 of 459
    pfp

    pfp Whatever

    1,559
    0
    Apr 28, 2009
    It hasn't worked? When was it tried?
    It gets discussed because consumers get fed up with paying good money for channels they don't care about with no option to opt-out.
     
  11. Jan 2, 2013 #11 of 459
    pdxBeav

    pdxBeav Godfather

    447
    35
    Jul 5, 2007
    This is exactly right. Instead of having a thousand Discovery channels each with their own niche programs, you would have one or two Discovery channels which would carry all the successful programs.

    Everyone who says a la carte won't work is assuming that the existing business models would remain static. This isn't the case. The programmers would adapt to it and make it work. As long as there's $$$ to be made it will work. And there's definitely $$$ to be made even in an a la carte world.
     
  12. Jan 2, 2013 #12 of 459
    hilmar2k

    hilmar2k Hall Of Fame

    5,251
    4
    Mar 18, 2007
    How many hours of unique programming do most networks provide? There is a lot of consolidation to be done, for sure. I am in agreement that there are way too many channels. With the continued proliferation of the DVR, there is no need to run every Pawn Stars episode 10 times per week.
     
  13. Jan 2, 2013 #13 of 459
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    203
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Yes. Because when discovery tries to sell a channel for X dollars, they won't try to sell a bundle so it looks like you get more.

    A la carte failed with BUDs.
     
  14. Jan 2, 2013 #14 of 459
    pdxBeav

    pdxBeav Godfather

    447
    35
    Jul 5, 2007
    Or 10 times per day. :lol:
     
  15. Jan 2, 2013 #15 of 459
    pdxBeav

    pdxBeav Godfather

    447
    35
    Jul 5, 2007
    If a la carte is such a bad idea then they should move to the other extreme and have one and only one package which includes all premium channels and all sports packages. According to the anti-a la carte group this would result in lower per channel costs so there should be no arguments against this. ;)
     
  16. Jan 2, 2013 #16 of 459
    pdxBeav

    pdxBeav Godfather

    447
    35
    Jul 5, 2007
    How did it fail with BUDs? My programming costs were far lower with a BUD than any cable or DBS package at the time.
     
  17. Jan 2, 2013 #17 of 459
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    203
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    They went bundle. A la carte is per channel. Bundles are not a la carte.

    And your costs were probably lower because of the lack of needed infrastructure to support you as you saw the same signal as cable companies than on a la carte. Not to mention that way back, there was a lot of open stuff (like networks and sports) that are not open today.
     
  18. Jan 2, 2013 #18 of 459
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    203
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Yes. Because we all think in extremes.
     
  19. Jan 2, 2013 #19 of 459
    Satelliteracer

    Satelliteracer Hall Of Fame

    3,042
    37
    Dec 6, 2006
    Actually, this is exactly wrong. Think about how a show comes into existence...the planning, testing, piloting, etc. You're looking at it through a post show successful launch. Now back up to prior to shows launching and how they come about. You will have many fewer new shows, much less of the riskier ones because there will no incentive to create them.
     
  20. Jan 2, 2013 #20 of 459
    pdxBeav

    pdxBeav Godfather

    447
    35
    Jul 5, 2007
    They only moved away from a la carte when BUD was on it's last leg. It was successful for most of it's existence. Once the BUD numbers dropped down to a few hundred thousand subs the programmers saw them as more of an annoyance and eventually stopped offering their service to them.
     

Share This Page