Hey Bear, you've been paying pretty close attention . Yeah, that's about all I watch. I could even give up the networks except for the sports programming. I did watch one episode of American Idol about a month ago, but only 'cause my kids and I were surfing thru the channels and they thought it looked cool. Besides that, I can't remember the last network show I watched. Maybe that's why I'm okay with a la carte. I don't find a whole lot that on my 100+ channels that interests me, and yes I do have a budget. Could I afford to spend $100+ on television? Yeah, I could but it just doesn't seem worth it to me. I've got other things to spend my $s and my time on. The point I was trying to make on the budget thing is that we've all been spending whatever we're comfortable with on television. I really don't believe that very many people would actually reduce their spending if they had an a la carte option. I think they'd just choose different channels than they get now for the same $s. Of course, some would, but I think that those lost $s would be made up with new people coming into the pay tv market. That's purely speculation on my part, so please don't try to ask me to prove it. It's just that I don't think all the gloom and doom that the status quo supporters are predicting would take place. Many people are happy with the current packages. If a la carte comes to pass, I hope it doesn't eliminate packages. If I believed that would happen, I'd be against a la carte too. I agree that for most people packages add value. Even in my C-Band days I had a package because I didn't want to be bothered trying to decide which channels I wanted. The few extra $s didn't matter that much and occasionally I watched one of those "freebies" that I wouldn't have ordered a la carte.