A LaCarte Programming

Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by Kendick, Feb 10, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Feb 10, 2006 #1 of 387
    Kendick

    Kendick Mentor

    39
    0
    Jan 31, 2005
    Various News and financial reporters are talking about a campaign to force Cable operators and others to offer customers choices of programming.
    I have not seen any response from Dish Network but it is an interesting development, especially since some Congressmen are talking about it. The Platinum package could be reducced substantially, if there was a choice.
    If one could choose only "Favorites", it might be a new ball game.
    Intersting......It could happen.
     
  2. Feb 10, 2006 #2 of 387
    rcbridge

    rcbridge Godfather

    252
    0
    Oct 31, 2002
    The primary group to convince are the content providers not the cable-co's and Satellite operators!
     
  3. Feb 10, 2006 #3 of 387
    FTA Michael

    FTA Michael Hall Of Fame

    3,474
    5
    Jul 21, 2002
    Dish Network, which has relatively minimal ownership of significant programming channels, is in favor of a la carte. But because this is not a Dish-specific issue, there has been more discussion of the FCC's new report in the General Discussion forum.
    http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=52574
     
  4. Feb 11, 2006 #4 of 387
    jrb531

    jrb531 Icon

    916
    0
    May 28, 2004
    Want to bet how long it takes for the "Programmer Plants" to invade this thread (like all the other ala-cart threads) and try to convince us how great forced packages are and how evil ala-cart is?

    Higher bills is a good thing because we get more channels for less $$$ even if 75% of those channels we never watch LOL.

    Egg salesman to the consumer....

    "But 120 eggs only cost you 40 cents each ($48)... it's so cheap to get them in bulk! Delivery is only $10 a month for ONLY $58 a month! If I were to only sell you the 30 eggs you want I would have to charge you $1.20 an egg!"

    Consumer to egg salesman....

    "But I only eat 1 egg a day and the rest will spoil after a month so I only want 30 eggs! Even at 3 times the bulk price I would still save money and not waste any eggs" ($1.20 x 30 = $36 + $10 delivery charge = $46)

    Egg salesman to the consumer....

    "Sorry we will only sell you 144 at a time no matter how many you use or toss out!"

    Consumers choice.... Do we take more than we want and toss out the rest or do we stop eating eggs?

    Some choice but a zillion channels is so very good for us!

    ROTFL

    -JB
     
  5. Feb 11, 2006 #5 of 387
    CCarncross

    CCarncross Hall Of Fame

    7,058
    60
    Jul 19, 2005
    Jackson
    A recent news story on ABC mentioned that if you chose between 17-20 channels, depending on which ones they were, ESPN will cost an arm and a leg, you might save between 3 and 13 percent...personally that isnt near enough of a savings for losing literally 80% of the channels you currently get now....put your aluminum hat back on, I think the radiation is getting in..."Programmer plants" LOL

    ;)
     
  6. Feb 11, 2006 #6 of 387
    fchall

    fchall AllStar

    57
    0
    Jan 26, 2006
    What's your problem with saving 3 to 13 percent to not get the 80% of channels you/I will never watch? ESPN will cost an arm and a leg. OH NO; go cry me a river. The espn channels would be the first to drop from my list and life( whiny women ) time next.
     
  7. Feb 11, 2006 #7 of 387
    the_bear

    the_bear Godfather

    420
    0
    Oct 18, 2004
  8. Feb 11, 2006 #8 of 387
    sikma

    sikma Godfather

    471
    0
    Dec 11, 2003
    Who cares what it costs or how much you would save. Give the public the choice. Like I've said in other posts, when I had my B.U.D. I could buy each channel seperately (yearly sub.) and if I remember correctly I spent around $225 a year in programming. AND, I only bought the channels I watched.............what an idea!
     
  9. Feb 11, 2006 #9 of 387
    jrb531

    jrb531 Icon

    916
    0
    May 28, 2004
    If you do not think that a few people on these boards are not employed by the billion dollar industry then I'll trade my aluminum hat for some swamp land :)

    This is one (if not the #1) of the open public forums for those in the know in regards to pay TV. If I was in charge of PR for one of the huge programmers and distributors I would consider a presence on this board to be most usefull for any number of reasons.

    While I do not see black helecopters following me *smiles* nor do I think "programmer spies" are lurking in every thread, I do think that a number of posters here are very well linked to the industry and as such a few posts that represent "their" interests have and will continue to be posted.

    -JB
     
  10. Feb 11, 2006 #10 of 387
    James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    49,410
    1,758
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    As long as it doesn't raise the package prices they can fool around with a la carte all they want. But I can't imagine a scheme that wouldn't raise package rates to cover losses.
     
  11. Feb 11, 2006 #11 of 387
    Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,626
    392
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    Also worth mentioning that a la carte predates packages... and it would appear the public has spoken years ago. IF a la carte was what the public wanted, then it would be what we have across the board... but when given the option more people chose packages that offered more channels for the same or less money than paying for individual channels.

    That's how we got to where we are today.

    I can't envision any kind of a la carte system forced on us today that wouldn't result in higher prices for some, less channels for all, and higher dissatisfaction for most.
     
  12. Feb 11, 2006 #12 of 387
    jrb531

    jrb531 Icon

    916
    0
    May 28, 2004
    When have "I" ever had a choice in the past 8 years with Dish to select the channels I wanted?

    When you use terms such as "if the public wanted it we would have it" - how do you justify this?

    The handfull or channels that were/are available as ala-cart is hardly a choice now is it? If you are alluding to the fact that the public can just voice their thoughts by cancelling all Pay TV... well that is just silly.

    I'm not trying to put words into your mouth so can you please clarify what you meant by the public has spoken?

    -JB

    P.S. If in the very beginning users had an option for ala-cart for the tiny number of channels available back then... how would this translate to 2006?
     
  13. Feb 11, 2006 #13 of 387
    FTA Michael

    FTA Michael Hall Of Fame

    3,474
    5
    Jul 21, 2002
    There was Dish Pics, which predates my Dish package.

    There was and is C-band a la carte.

    Those are two examples of a la carte that predate our current packages.

    Also, here are two points to keep in mind:

    * A la carte vs. packages doesn't have to be exclusive. The Canadian system is a good example -- once you hit your minimum, you can pick and choose or you can get plans with several packages.

    * We don't know what form of a la carte we're talking about. Is this reverse a la carte, where subs get a little for opting out of a channel? Will absolutely every channel be available individually? We just don't know.
     
  14. Feb 11, 2006 #14 of 387
    CCarncross

    CCarncross Hall Of Fame

    7,058
    60
    Jul 19, 2005
    Jackson
    Are we only a few of the ones that actually get it?

    :eek2:

    Yes choice is a great thing, but the small percentage of people that are actually willing to potentially pay extra for the choice of fewer channels is very very small, almost infinitesimal...when an actual a la carte pricing plan is released, and if any changes that will create for their current pricing plans, we can all talk about this until the cows come home....

    Several a la carte models have been attempted in the last 20 years or so, they failed each and every time....pretty soon, the providers dont try again....

    How much do you really think you pay for all those channels you consider garbage channels you dont watch? Percentages will say you pay very little...sure there will exceptions.

    There are valid arguments for both sides, in teh end, we all lose something, as is the case in almost all format type wars....
     
  15. Feb 11, 2006 #15 of 387
    Link

    Link Hall Of Fame

    1,804
    4
    Feb 1, 2004
    They need to offer a la carte or more variety in packages because at the rate they increase package prices $3 or $4 a year--in 5 years no one will hardly be able to afford satellite or cable TV.
     
  16. Feb 11, 2006 #16 of 387
    Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,626
    392
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    Carload beat me to it... The DishPics choice plan, which I gather there are still a handful of people grandfathered into that old plan... the C-band that a lot of folks point out as an option for a la carte... and the early days of cable & satellite all brought various forms of a la carte.

    The common complain against cable in the early days was why pay for TV? Then it became, why pay so much for just a few channels? Cable and then satellite really didn't start to take off until there was more variety available. And the variety is partially supported by the bundles that permit the stronger channels to prop up the new and/or weaker channels.

    Many of the channels we have today would not be able to exist if they weren't part of the packages.

    No one can say 100% for sure what would happen if a new a la carte system were forced on us... but I have a strong feeling that it would be one of those "be careful what you wish for" scenarios that would implode the entertainment industry and result in less channels for the same or slightly more money.
     
  17. Feb 11, 2006 #17 of 387
    jrb531

    jrb531 Icon

    916
    0
    May 28, 2004
    When in the past 10 years has anyone offered true ala-cart aside from a few nitch channels? Because it failed 10+ years ago with a third of the available channels when we were paying less than half what we do now means that in 2006 it will fail again?

    Don't know about you but the cost of pay TV has grown to be so much that the entire notion that ala-cart will never make any form of real dent seems a bit outdated.

    How many people on this forum have "ever" had the choice to pick and choose "all" their channels?

    Anyone?

    -JB
     
  18. Feb 11, 2006 #18 of 387
    jrb531

    jrb531 Icon

    916
    0
    May 28, 2004
    So because of what "might" happen we should be locked into the current setup? Is there a middle road?

    I bet the consumers would compromise.... it seems like the programmers are unwilling to give even an inch.

    -JB
     
  19. Feb 11, 2006 #19 of 387
    Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,626
    392
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    We study the past so that we are not doomed to repeat it! Why repeat past mistakes?

    Oh... and perhaps by the numbers we may be paying more at $40 today vs $20 20 years ago... but $40 today isn't worth near as much as $20 was back in the early 1980s. I daresay a LOT more people today afford satellite and cable that couldn't even imagine paying for TV back in 1985.

    So if TV were truly pricing itself out of the market, the market wouldn't be growing as it has been in recent years. The fact that more people keep adding cable or satellite and upgrade to more expensive packages to boot, tends to disprove the theory that TV is becoming too expensive.
     
  20. Feb 11, 2006 #20 of 387
    StarTech

    StarTech Cool Member

    27
    0
    Oct 2, 2004
    Why not BOTH?

    Put basic packages in place,

    The offer programing on a channel and channel basis,

    Let's face facts here, some channels wouldn't be here it not for PACKAGES.

    So put the low interest channels in packages and offer the popular ones at say a buck and a half each per month.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

spam firewall