Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Satellite Discussion' started by AJ2086, Jul 31, 2002.
But why should Cable be require to carry it and not DBS? They are the same to me... :shrug:
AJ, you need to detmine whether you are receiving value for your dollar spent. If your locals cost too much, don't order them. Pretty simple. I currently pay $4 per month for locals (Total Choice Plus $35.99 w/locals $39.99) and feel I receive my money's worth simply for the convenience of recording them on my PVR. If I felt that the $4 was too much, I wouldn't subscribe.
I'm not going to stop saying it. They need to give the $0.98 savings for AT100 and AT150. Actually, they need to give a $1.50 savings on this package for AT100 and a $2 savings for AT150. All this new package and any package with AT50 does attract people who don't have cable or satellite. If they want get people to switch from cable they need to make deals with AT100 or AT150.
Do you really think a louzy 0.98 is going to convince anyone? We waste larger amounts of money on the littlest things in life.
I think the locals should be the same price everywhere even if some cities have more locals, we should not penalize some for having more or having less locals than the other. They could make up for this by adding distant networks not offered in that city and that would even things up if this became a real issue.
Also because there is one company vs. many companies over the U.S. that should not make a difference in the number of channels into each market that goes up which would result in a great number of channels just like there is on must carry vs. what it would be if it was just used for one area of the country.
My solution is that we charged by the number of eyes we use to watch the locals. I jsut listen to the sound so ii should get them for free.
I also think that Nick should not be allowed to post because neither provider carries the locals on Nevele.
Nicj? Wait a minute! I know him. He floats over in the next nitrous oxide bubble, about 2 kiloflarbs away.
Go ahead Nick make fun of the arthritic guy. lol
The DBS companies make more money off of the big markets that have more channels then the small markets with less channels. The cost of getting the signal to the POP is the responsibility of the "must carry" channels, the cost to DBS providers to provide the POP is ruffly the same weather it is a large or small market. If one wants to take to the extreme then it would be more fair for the small market to pay more for less channels in their locals package. If the merger goes through and I get my Chattanooga locals on satellite I will be more then happy to pay $4-6 extra for my 7 or 8 local channels even though NY or LA may get 20+ for the same price.
If the merger is approved and the New E* does put up all 210 DMA's I suspect all new subs at that time will only have the choice of basic programing packages that include locals. I suspect that these packages will still be $4-6 higher then they would be without the locals, however their will no longer be a choice, at least for new subs. By bundling locals with all basic programing packages it will help defray the expense of putting up all 210 DMA's plus make for good marketing.
Why bundle it if people are willing to pay for it? :shrug:
Because not everyone buys the locals, if the New E* sells only bundled basic packages then %100 of new subs will be paying for locals, thus more money to help pay for those smaller DMA's that will be loss leaders anyway.
Maybe, then again the lower (but not entirely comparable) price without locals looks good against cable.
The price may even be less for the locals if everyone takes them. When bundled with the basic packages this will be very important.
yes it MIGHT be. It M(GHt NOT be too.
Well as long as they can get away with it, they will. And I'll be at the front of the line with my $5...
Me too. For the $4 I spend each month for locals, I receive the most value for the minutes spent.
I figure they will have a package for $25 with the locals for a basic package, maybe even a lifeline type of service where they offer just locals or the locals and a few cable channels like cable does, but more likely a cheap basic package with the locals. If it gets above $25 say like $28-$30 for the cheapest package then this is not going to look as competitive against cable. Not everyone will want the locals if they can receiver them from an outdoor antenna yet cable makes u take the locals.
Very interesting what they will choose to do. When the digital standard in 2006 comes around or whenever it does more people will be able to receive them on an antenna and less will want the locals, am I right?
No, not really, Jacob. When the transition has been completed, the reception of "locals" with an antenna will most likely DEcrease - not INcrease! The reason? Digital tv signals will, like DBS satellite be either a "go" or a "no go" situation. You'll either get crystal clear pix or, you'll get nothing at all ... nothing in between. This means that it won't be an option for people to accept less than optimum signals on "locals" since they're getting them for free via an antenna. Depending on where they live and the distance from the local transmitters, many people will get NO reception of the DTV signals, when they used to get the NTSC analog signals OK if not actually good. Thus, the need to get local channels from satellite or cable (ugh!) will increase, not the other way around.
Also, FYI - the completion of the transition to DTV was scheduled for December 31st, 2006 or, in other words the beginning of 2007. But this date has already been unofficially scrapped, as it has become apparent that it will not be met! When the day finally will arrive is anyone's guess at this point - but it will probably be several years after the scheduled date, IMO.
Then again not everyone WANTS them. Unlike USA, TNT,CNN etc some people get them adequately (dare I say it BETTER) for free.
Agreed with the fact you can get them free, but when you have a PVR its much easier to just get them from the satellite...
That is true, the PVR feature of the satellite and better picture quality and everything with one dish will be a great convenience.
With these DTV signals will it come in better for some that can get enough signal to come in with less interference? Could the stations boost the power on these so that so many people will not lose the signal?