1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

So Tired Of The Price Game!

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by CallMeCoach, Jan 29, 2013.

  1. Jan 29, 2013 #61 of 202
    veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    So if "a la carte is coming", what's the hold up?

    I'd imagine EVERY service provider could/would simply crunch the numbers to set a price where they make their profit and offer it to the customer. It's in their best interest and they increase/keep more customers.

    When you're dealing with billion dollar corporations, they're all looking out for themselves, so the content providers sure look to be the ones that are the holdup, doesn't it?
     
  2. Jan 29, 2013 #62 of 202
    CallMeCoach

    CallMeCoach Mentor

    46
    0
    Jan 29, 2013
    Thank you.



    Whoever does it the best with a competitive/cheap rate, wins.
     
  3. Jan 29, 2013 #63 of 202
    veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    Ideally this might be the case, but in "the real world", whoever leverages their position best wins.
     
  4. Jan 29, 2013 #64 of 202
    PCampbell

    PCampbell Icon

    1,639
    98
    Nov 18, 2006
    The price will not change until enough people drop all services Netflix include
     
  5. Jan 29, 2013 #65 of 202
    Hoosier205

    Hoosier205 New Member

    6,659
    14
    Sep 3, 2007
    While ignoring the cost of the content they do want. The content they do watch relies on the revenue from the content owners retrans deals with traditional providers and their ad sales.
     
  6. Jan 29, 2013 #66 of 202
    Hoosier205

    Hoosier205 New Member

    6,659
    14
    Sep 3, 2007
    That's also when the content disappears.
     
  7. Jan 29, 2013 #67 of 202
    JeffBowser

    JeffBowser blah blah blah

    2,549
    18
    Dec 21, 2006
    I'm no fan of current programming, and also only watch a handful of channels out of my package with any regularity. That being said, there is no way in hell I'd support a la carte. I firmly believe that would result in even higher pricing than we're paying now, without the side-benefit of the other channels you might tune into once in a while.
     
  8. Jan 29, 2013 #68 of 202
    Skunkmutha

    Skunkmutha Cool Member

    14
    0
    Aug 16, 2006
    Hardcore Pawn and Lizard Lick Towing are two of my favorite shows. What do you mean?
     
  9. Jan 29, 2013 #69 of 202
    jeffgbailey

    jeffgbailey Legend

    213
    1
    Feb 28, 2008
    AMEN!

    If I could have A&E, TruTV and History along with my locals I'd be fine
     
  10. Jan 29, 2013 #70 of 202
    jeffgbailey

    jeffgbailey Legend

    213
    1
    Feb 28, 2008
    but you fail to realize while you get live sports unless its the NFL the odds of getting your favorite team on OTA are pretty slim.
    All the stations that show live sports have their favorites in the schedules already. So as a NHL fan my local team wont be on the NHL game of the week on NBC because they use the same 6 teams.
    Baseball might be 5 or 6 games a year
    NBA we do have some on local TV but never on ABC

    NFL is different as they embrace (to a point) the networks and dont go running to the cable stations. While ESPN and NFL Net has games, if your team is one of them it will be on a OTA station (blackouts pending)

    Heck even Nascar after Memorial Day pretty much requires cable/satellite for ESPN/TNT.
     
  11. Jan 29, 2013 #71 of 202
    inhd40

    inhd40 Mentor

    115
    4
    Jan 26, 2013
    I'm not sold that price would go up and content would go down from ala cart. Prices would be very competitive to see who would get the consumers dollar. I also doubt that the History Channel would still run Pawn Stars 24/7.
     
  12. Jan 29, 2013 #72 of 202
    KyL416

    KyL416 Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    4,197
    538
    Nov 10, 2005
    Tobyhanna, PA
    You no longer have the guaranteed numbers that you use to set advertising rates. (What makes most non-sports basic cable channels less than 50 cents for the provider) The niche channels can no longer rely on bundling with their flagship sister stations so no more eyeballs passing by them as they flip channels or see them in the guide. Every network now needs to compete for the most amount of viewers to even get carriage which leads to program shifts with no sister station to dump the niche programming. (i.e. no ID or Military for Discovery)

    Take a look at some recent Nielsen numbers, it's Honey Boo Boo, Family Guy reruns on TBS or Adult Swim, Monday Night Football, Monday Night Raw and Jersey Shore and its spinoffs that get the highest viewers.
     
  13. Jan 29, 2013 #73 of 202
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    The only local teams I get regularly on OTA are the Ravens and Redskins. The Orioles and Nationals are about 5 games a year. The Wizards are none. The Capitals are none. There are some local college games but the vast, vast majority of them are on ESPN or other cable outlets.

    The time of "free" sports are gone for the most part. More and more teams are going cable/satellite outlets only.
     
  14. Jan 29, 2013 #74 of 202
    FLWingNut

    FLWingNut Godfather

    467
    12
    Nov 19, 2005
    They wouldn't because that show and that channel would go away.
     
  15. Jan 29, 2013 #75 of 202
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    We currently have a free market and capitalism. And it gave us the system we have today.

    Those clamoring for a la carte are only looking at the consumer end of the equation and are EXTREMELY pollyanna-ish about the whole thing.

    A free market finding its equilibrium is all about all forces (and there are many involved here: consumers, providers - including internet services, content owners, content creators and even more) coming to a balance.

    Yes, consumers can change the equation by not buying as much as what is offered today, but the market is clearly not there for pure a la carte or massive cord cutting or someone would have already exploited it.

    Companies like DirecTV, Comcast, Verizon, Amazon, Netflix, etc., are not stupid. They are finding their balance. And for the majority, the bundle still works.

    Pure cord cutting basically only works for people who watch little TV, practically no sports whatsoever, or only watch movies or YouTube. For the vast majority of Americans, the linear channel, big selection system still works best.

    Netflix, Hulu, etc., are living on the fringe and are happy to do so. They are making money on the portion of the market that they support. BTW, they also get money from us who have it all. Because sometimes you just want to dial up that Dick Van Dyke rerun or want to watch a movie that is not available today via other means.

    And that makes me laugh. People look at the success of Netflix and say "see! cordcutting" when I would be the majority of Netflix users have cable or satellite and aren't cutting a damned thing.


    edit to add: A free market means no interference by government. I am not aware that the government is forcing bundling. In fact, the nirvana of a la carte folks is supposed to be Canada, where the unbundling was forced by the government. Hmm, a la carte requires a non-free market to exist...
     
  16. Jan 29, 2013 #76 of 202
    inhd40

    inhd40 Mentor

    115
    4
    Jan 26, 2013
    I doubt the History Channel would go away. H2 probably would, but who cares? They simply move that programming to the main channel. Might it be more expensive? Sure. Probably would be a push as far as price goes overall.
     
  17. Jan 29, 2013 #77 of 202
    Hoosier205

    Hoosier205 New Member

    6,659
    14
    Sep 3, 2007
    Then they also have far less revenue to pay for purchased content or to produce their own.
     
  18. Jan 29, 2013 #78 of 202
    tonyd79

    tonyd79 Hall Of Fame

    12,971
    204
    Jul 24, 2006
    Columbia, MD
    Let's see. H2 exists because the programming on it used to be on the History Channel but the folks at the History Channel saw their ratings go up when they pushed real history programming aside for reality programming. So, why would you think that when they are purely dollar driven for each viewer they would bring back the programming they abandoned because the ratings were low?

    And who cares? So, we lose more choices. We get fewer opportunities for different types of programming. Who cares? We all get to watch the same crap. Fewer channels, fewer choices. At that is within the same genre!

    And a push as far as price is concerned? You mean you are willing to pay $100 for 10 channels if you get 50 now for the same $100? Now, that is some wise consumerism!
     
  19. Jan 29, 2013 #79 of 202
    bigglebowski

    bigglebowski Legend

    225
    2
    Jul 27, 2010
    Oh its this thread again...

    Do some of you guys not get tired fighting the same battles over and over again. I mean I understand answering the same tech support type questions over and over for different people, but this???

    Sorry for the interruption, carry on.
     
  20. Jan 29, 2013 #80 of 202
    inhd40

    inhd40 Mentor

    115
    4
    Jan 26, 2013
    How are you losing anything? The same shows are on, just on less channels. I get that this could go the other way, that I might be wrong. I just can't see where anyone could know that the outcome would be bad. I guess if you like to say I get 400 channels, that is worth something.
     

Share This Page