Slashdot Mirror
Cable TV A La Carte?
Anonymous Coward writes "According to this BusinessWeek article you can now get your MTV a la carte. I having been waiting for years to buy my cable by the channel, and this article indicates that my cable company is now legally required to let me. I am going to call Time Warner tomorrow with my list just to see what they say. Anyone out there doing this now?"
Glad to hear it, now I can get TLC, Discovery, MTV2 and all the other good channels without BET and Lifetime.
-1 (Troll) is antihammer
It says you can get HBO without having to pay for a premium level of service. They can still require you to get basic service and even make you rent a digital box.
This can't be true. I mean, who's going to explicitly ask for the three religious channels, the channel where they talk about hot rods, and that one that's just a bad radio station? These things get bundled for a reason.
Damn, that sucks, maybe I should actually read this stuff.
-1 (Troll) is antihammer
If you read the article... it's only talking about getting premium channels individually. So you can get just one nightly dose of Skinemax, w/o paying for cinemax 2, 3 and 4.
Doesn't apply to basic cable.
What kind of price limits are they put to? Same price as in a package of channels? Obviously, if they aren't held to any firm price limits, they'll just charge $20/channel, and nobody will buy it.
I do think this is a good law though, How many people on slashdot would want to get cable just for TechTV?
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
1 John 4:14
I am sure that the 'package' pricing will make consumer choice still include a few channels that would otherwise not be purchased. How many cable channels rely on being packaged with other groups of channels just to get a shot at having some eyeballs watching them?
Package deal - 39.99
Individual Channels - $3.00 -$5.00 per channel.
It could add up very quickly, and I think that most consumers couldn't be bothered to pick and choose channels while taking pricing into account IMO.
Cheers,
VonKraken
The headline and description are totally wrong. The rule says that a Cable company must allow you to buy HBO/Showtime/Cinimax/TMC without signing up for premium cable. So this means if you don't like watching MTV, Discovery Wings, or other non-Basic cable channels, but you watch HBO, you can drop Premium cable, but still keep HBO.
Come play Heroes of Might and Magic Mini online.
It would be better to have 70 channels of things you want to watch, rather than have 125 channels which include 4 home shopping networks, oxygen, lifetime,5 gardening channels etc....
Letting the viewers decide what they want to pay for is quite a concept. What took em so long?
---
When you come to a fork in the road, take it! --Yogi Berra--
If the cable companies start losing money on the pay-per-channel, they'll simply rebundle the premium channels (the ones that most people are willing to pay for per channel) and bundle those into basic service making you pay more in the end. Rule #1: In the end, the customer always loses.
As long as I can keep Women's Entertainment (WE) I'm fine.
"This isn't a study in computer science, its a study in human behavior"
..they have always a stick behind the door to still screw some of your hard earnd dosh (tm) out of you!
Yes, that right! Just read this:
"It's up to our clients [the cable operators] to decide how they offer our services,"
Translation: we got a stick behind the door.
"It's our hope that our affiliates would use whatever tactics are available to increase their premium penetration."
Translation: We're gonna screw you with it!
Moderation: +4. Modded 70% Funny and 30% Overrated. 100% Saturated.
For places with digital cable, we have the following setup. I'm not speaking for all of Canada, but at least with this cable provider (Rogers).
1) Analog channels. Channels 2-~78 are analog. We can choose between 3 "tiers" which determine what type of filter is installed at the cable box itself. 2-28 is "basic" cable. 29-~42(?) is another tier, ~43-78 is another. They are grouped this way as to make filtering easier. Changing the programming is a PITA as someone has to physically drive down from the cable company and change things. Usually being wishy-washy as to what you want will net you a $50 charge each time someone has to drive over.
2) Digital channels. Channels 80-999 are digital. You can order most any of the "basic" ones for $2.50 / each / month. Bundling them in bigger sets gets you bigger discounts. ie: 5 channels for $10, 10 channels for $15, etc. You can mix and match as you please, and they are activated usually before your call to the cable company is finished.
It's been this way for a year and a quarter now.
My wife would divorce me if I were to cancel Lifetime.
Goodbye Showcase, CNN, Discovery, TLC, Sci-Fi.. hello pr0n!
Trolling is a art,
We've had cable à la carte in Quebec for at least 4 years. You pay a small premium for the ability to pick your channels, but it is always worth it.
Here is an example of one of our à la carte providers.
Do you want to remove linux?
Blah, legislation should be spent on opening up cable internet access to other competitors like DSL rather than allowing them to retain their heavy monopoly.
What about satalite packages? I would love to buy just only buy specifcal local chanels (Denver, Miami, and LA) with just Sci-fi, discovery and nuddie channels. Unfortunatly Dish Network, makes you buy a shitload of other channels if I want sci-fi and discovery :(
NO! NO! Please don't mod me, I'm too young to die a troll. *click* Oh the pain, the pain...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
They just need to make every channel a 'premium' channel like HBO. I'd buy that, 'Comedy Central', 'Cartoon Network', 'Animeal Planet', and maybe 'TLC', and no others. I'd still spend less than I am now.
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
They honestly need more stations like VH-1 Classic(ie MTV back when it was worth watching). All they seem to play are blocks of mega-obscure videos from the early 80s(and some '70s in their own time slots). I end up just leaving it on that channel for the entire weekend seeing videos I never knew existed before. Commercials? yeah, they seem to air them every 45 minutes or so. I watch that instead of G4 all the time now.
It's too bad MTV2 failed where VH-1 classic picked up. Imagine, a channel that plays just music videos that time hath forgotten! Never thought I would see the day VH-1 Classic is playing Megadeth videos while MTV plays "Fast Lane".
What are the cable deals like for Slashdot readers outside of the US?
I spent four months living in France this year and my cable provider had a point system. Each channel cost a certain number of points (ranging from about 2 for something boring up to 15-25 for a premium channel) and you paid for packages with varying amounts of points. Then you could pick the channels you wanted and not waste points on something you would never watch. It seemed like a better deal (perhaps not cheaper, but much more flexible) than what we have in the US. I don't even have cable here since I'm not a huge fan of television and cable TV packages cost more than I am willing to pay.
-Joe
that's cause you don't have any hills. If I wouldn't get cable, I'd have 4 channels, most with horrible reception.
--
I post links to stuff here
Yeah - I have satellite and only need the local channels from cable - yet I would have to subscribe to a package of like 30 channels and rent a box from them in order to get the local channels.
IIRC, you can still do this for basically every channel if you've got one of the big satellite dishes with a C and Ku band receiver. There are packages, too, and some are unencryped over the bird.
I used to dig watching M2 when it was new, and I was spending late, late nights in the TV station. *sigh* Master Control sucks.
even with the Max Headroom reruns?
we've only had TechTV for about a year on our crappy digital cable, and i've had a lifetime dose of Screen Savers. even my M$-lovin' roomate can't take most of their programming. i watched the Apple keynotes that they showed, and Max Headroom... that's about it i think. i tried to watch more but it gets bogged down in M$ Windows nonsense that means nothing to me. oh well.
Anyone know which federal rule that caused this? I read the article and its a little light on the details.
I'd like to see the actual federal mandate to see what it actually covers before going to Time Warner here in Austin and asking them to give me some pricing info. If anyone's already done this here, reply and let me know..
Cruising the internet on my TI-99/4A @ a whopping 300 baud!
Some history on Dallas TV stations, if you're truly bored or interested:
Channel 27 is owned by the same group that owns KDFW, and they re-run "Fox 4 News" at 10:30. KPXD has a deal going with channel 5, so they re-show KXAS' news at some point ("5 on PAX"). Regarding KDAF, there's some controversy over what that should have been. Common rumour has it being "K-Dallas And Fort worth."
KLDT used to be owned by televangelist Robert Tilton, and has its transmitter in Lewisville. Common reasons for its callsign are "K-Lewisville-Dallas-Television" or "K-Lake-Dallas-Television" (after the lake cities town of the same name).
KFWD used to be the Telemundo affiliate, before they switched to 39. I believe Hispanic Broadcasting now owns them.
KSTR was Home Shopping Network's entry into the broadcast "shop at home" idea, which flopped miserably. They bounced between one satellite feed or another of some teleshopping network, before Univision bought them, too. For some reason they run Dallas Stars, I guess none of the major stations wanted to pick up the license.
I would just like to say that KXTX used to be a lot better. They would do re-runs of a lot of old shows, and even some first-runs. I remember watching first-runs of Knight Rider, as well as re-runs of A-Team on that channel. For the Star Trek buffs, KTXA has always been the station that ran Star Trek for Dallas. I knew their "Star Trek manager," the guy who was in charge of everything related, and he was a fanatic about making sure station management picked up the syndex rights for every episode.
is JapanTV, a 24/7 NHK feed. I'd have to upgrade my DirecTV decoder and get a new oval dish with dual receivers. Then I can get JTV a la carte for only $30/month. But I'd have to invest about $300 before I can even start spending the $30/mo. At least it would all work with my TiVo, they even have program listings. They have a bunch of ultrapremium channels in this price range or higher. Ouch, those prices are too damn high!
It says you can get HBO without having to pay for a premium level of service. They can still require you to get basic service and even make you rent a digital box.
Actually, in the case of AOL/TW, you are required to have digital cable in order to have HBO, because they simply don't offer HBO on their analog cable.
'Sides, one thing they can do (and are doing) to control this is with cable modems. I have AOL/TW's cable modem service. They charge $44.95/mo unless you have at least what they call their 'extended basic' package, which costs $39.95/mo. Otherwise, the price is $89.95/mo for the cable modem by itself.
My journal has hot
My cable provider (Adelphia) offers TV in bundles with Broadcast, ($11/mo) Basic, (+$20/mo) and then premium stuff, whose price I don't know. They also offer Internet.
I don't know if they will offer Internet without at least Broadcast cable TV. But they add a surcharge to the cable Internet if you don't have at least Basic, so you may as well get Basic.
Pricing for Internet wasn't mentioned, but now this makes me wonder if this practice is legal.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
My dad's worked in cable engineering since its inception and has always said that ala carte pricing is not a good idea.
First off, it's more expensive. Consider: a fair price for a channel you really want is probably 2-5$ per month. I receive 85 channels for $23. Even eliminating the dozens I don't watch, there's more than 10 channels I do want to get, including all five major networks, comedy central, cartoon network and a gaggle of learning channels, BBCA and of course Food TV.
Second off, it's not really good for the cable co based on how the cable companies receive and send the channels themselves. Everything's handled by big blocks of splitters and amplifiers. Each handles a set of channels. Channels are pulled down from satelites in blocks as well...TWC in Albany has a set of five or so, one of which is dedicated to all the myriad HBOs, one to all the turner channels, etc. So it makes sense to sell TV in blocks...it's impossible to accurately tell how much a SINGLE channel costs you. In fact, after setup costs and maintenance costs and offsetting the possibility of customer service, just getting one channel may cost about $15 on a good margin, while getting fifty channels on the same line would only be pennies more.
Finally, it's not fair for marginal channels. You know all those channels you don't watch, like History or Speedvision or Golf TV or Univision? They're all somebody's favorite channel, believe it or not. There may be very few people who watch them, but they're getting equal billing due to being part of a package deal. Thus, they also have the ability to get hugely popular -- after all, you're more likely to catch something interesting on than if you had to order it specifically. Would TV Food be such a mainstay in our house were it not for having actually seen Good Eats, Iron Chef, David Rosengarden's Taste or Jamie Oliver? No. Hell, we wouldn't have ordered "ala carte" a channel that was ostensibly just reruns of Julia Childs.
Block pricing isn't really that expensive, anyway. I get 85 channels and broadband internet for less than the a quarter of the cost of my car's insurance and upkeep, and I sure get a lot more utility out of it.
Hey freaks: now you're ju
Or maybe the AC submitter should have actually read the article before submitting, with a totally wrong title.
1984 was supposed to be a warning, not an instruction manual.
This article depresses me because of two opposing facts:
1. People don't care about networks, they care about shows. Give me "The Sopranos", "Survivor", "Cowboy Bebop", "[Insert your favorite show here]", a la carte. I couldn't care less about these dinosaurs called networks. The sooner networks disappear the better.
2. But, this show based nirvana is never going to happen because the companies controlling the television system are just as violently opposed to changing their business model as the [RI|MP]AA companies. So even with a la carte networks, I'm still going to have to pay for 167 hours of crap each week for the one hour I do want.
Feh! A pox on all their houses.
I live in Westchester County, NY, a suburb of NYC. We recently moved from one Cablevision area to another, and lost some favorite channels from the standard lineup. I called Cablevision, and they added each channel I wanted for about 75 cents per month. Not bad!
Although it sucks that we get fewer channels now for a higher price (even before adding the 75 cents) than we did in our old area.
$8.95/mo web hosting
Actually, in the case of AOL/TW, you are required to have digital cable in order to have HBO, because they simply don't offer HBO on their analog cable.
BS! In Columbus, OH where I live, if your on Time Warner, if your on BASIC service (which is Analog) you can get 3 channels of HBO for price of one. For Digital subscribers, you can get 14 HBO's for the price of one. Doesn't do me any good cuz I'd never watch HBO any way.
Gorkman
See, the thing is that they have enough bandwidth now to deliver 500 channels. So their business is getting like $50 a month from each subscriber. Once they have the bandwidth, giving you 500 channels isn't much more expensive (if at all) than giving you 3. They are not going to give a discount simply because they don't *get* a discount in terms of reduced expenses by providing fewer channels.
The only way it would make sense for them is market segmentation. In other words, if some new pricing scheme made them more money than it lost (in terms of full subscribers switching down), then they'll do it. This is why they offer a really shitty basic cable - they want it to be just better than a rooftop antenna, but limited enough that it makes you want premium.
So no, there is no system under which we all end up paying less for cable than we are now.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
Actually, I believe that the $44 vs the $89 is to combat cable piracy. It was discovered a while back (prolly been exploited for a couple years now) that all you need to do is splice the cable to your modem, just as you would to split signals between tv sets, and viola... free cable TV. So, if you don't get cable tv from us, we're going to charge you for it anyway. That way, we don't care if you're splitting it off for free TV.
put the what in the where?
I don't think it would be unfair for Speedvision to not subsidise GolfTV.
Actually I think it is unfair that a Speedvision viewer would have to subsidize GolfTV.
My box lets me hide the channels That are not watched in my home.
;)
That means whe I surf I only surf the channels I watch.
so take the 30 dollars divide that by the 20 channels that are watched. that means I'm paying 1.5 dollars per channel PLUS I get a bunch of "preview" channels of other shows, in case I want to see what my other options are.
In short, just filter the channel you don't watch then see how much per channel you enjoy that you are paying. Probably getting a better deal then if you bought the channel individually.
OTOH, thats not what the article was about, it was about not having to buy a premium package just to get HBO/Showtime.
see, I did read the article
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I want the Shania Twain chanel. Muted, of course.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
The local cable company here in Canada charges us 10.00/month for the digital cable box which we bought from them for 129.00 so we don't even pay that. They have this thing that's 20.00 for 20 channels, plus 1.50 or so for every other channel you want. You also have to pay 8.95/month for a basic set of 50 some odd channels.
Why is it that I can't just buy the porn channel and a few others? sure, I get about 15 religious and infomercial stations that I never watch (but end up paying for), but what I really want is the ability to only view what I asked for. If I wanted the latino HBO, I would have bought it. Since I get it, and I have to purchase 5 HBOs all together for one price, I end up paying extra for something I don't use. I think a la carte pricing is on its way, and not a moment too soon. The only reason cable companies would not want this is because they are subsidized by the extra crap.
What if the internet was this way and you had to pay to view other web pages that you were not interested in just to get to the few that you actually want to see? Oh wait, NetZero and Juno couldn't give that away. the only difference I see is the cable companies don't have to compete for local market share (can you say monopoly?).
Why read the article when I can just make up a snap judgement?
That's rare. I've never seen that many cables come in clear in any semi-large city. It just doesn't happen. You're lucky if you get "watchable" reception on 4 channels. And at that you get your choice of NBC, CBS, PBS, and a spanish channel.
In Quebec with Videotron at least, digital tv has packages, but can be bought a-la-carte. You do need to get a base package which includes a few channels (like all on-air stations), but that's about CAN$10. You then have to choice to buy any channels you want. Most cost, if i remember correctly, CAN$1.50, but things like Playboy will cost you more.
I found i still preferred to get a big package, though, just because i like to have lots of channels around. But someone who only wants the essential plus HBO wouldn't have to buy a package.
Well, TV is mostly crap anyway. Fewer choices of crap might motivate you to do more active things that absorb boob-toob radiation all night.
XML causes global warming.
It's illegal to charge someone more for using a credit card. It doesn't stop one of the local gas stations from giving me a "discount" for using cash.
I imagine they will charge a crazy amount for individual channels, but then give a "discount" for multiple channels. I may get 10 channels for $40 now, but if I ask, they'll probably charge $10 each and then bundle the 10 for $40.
My cable company, Adelphia, is made up of a bunch of weasels (some of whom are now headed to jail for dipping into the profits for personal use) always looking to screw people. Where there's a weasel, there's a way.
Because the link is slow, here is the text of that rule:
Dishnetwork is offering a deal right now for 80 bucks for the dish 500 and reciever only. You have to sign up for a year of international programming though.
Want to know the funny thing? NHK's feed is free to air to the rest of the world via c-band sattelite. Actually according to charts (you can find them on NHK's web page) it shows that you can recieve NHK via c-band, but requires one of those 6 foot dishes.
I'd like to get TVJapan myself, since my speaking ability has degraded since my time in college there, but my house is surrounded by high trees so I don't have line of sight.
Bring back the old version of slashdot.
One of the side effects of this is that plenty of cable television networks will not survive. Eventually the cable companies will be able to weed out the networks that do nothing to increase their viewer base and just suck up money. Comedy Central will make a much bigger cut of the cable money pie, as will Food Network(I'm guessing here, but I love it), CNN, Lifetime(unfortunately) and a few others (I'll leave the readers to fill-in their own blanks). At the same time those bandwidth/money sucking networks would get a smaller and smaller piece.
My point is: Showtime is a premium pay movie channel... OF COURSE they want bigger [market] penetration. It means more money for them. They are a business. It's tantamount to Ford saying "We hope our dealers use whatever tools are at their disposal to sell more cars."
put the what in the where?
I just spoke to a comcast representative and he told me that I can get HBO with basic service.. BUT I would have to get both the 'standard' and 'digital' packages to get HBO2, HBO-west, etc (which are included in the price of the single HBO but inaccessable without the digital reciever)
:)
I can't find any information about this law anywhere. I'm going to contact the FCC and find out more
"Your call is important to us, please hold"
sulli
RTFJ.
Suppose every channel were considered a "premium" channel and people had to subscribe to each one individually. Some channels would go up in price, such as MTV, CNN, etc., and some would go down in price: CourtTV, etc.
I think the end result would be that some channels would make enough money to be sustainable. I would expect that most of the less popular channels would only be available in major markets (such as large urban centers with lots of subscribers).
The "packaging" that has existed in Cable TV has allowed some of the smaller networks/channels to exist even though they only have a niche audience. Yes, everybody pays a little extra, but the diversity of programming is pretty high.
Amazing magic tricks
Contrary to what the Slashdot article implies, the provision regulates only "video programming offered on a per channel or per program basis," (e.g. HBO or pay-per-view) not channels like MTV that are offered only as part of a package. Also, it is not clear whether it would apply to an HBO 1+2+3 "package" since technically these are not offered on a per channel basis.
However, for channels that do fall under this provision, the operator is prohibited from discriminating against customers who subscribe only to the rock-bottom basic package, so they must be able to get HBO for $5/month if customers on the super-ultra package can.
I bought cable internet without cable television but decided to try it anyway to see if it had been left unblocked. The ONLY chanel I get is Lifetime. It must be a cruel joke.
It's part of the 1992 cable Act: Section 623(b)(8) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. Volume 47 of the US Code Section 543(b)(8).
You can find it online at
http://uscode.house.gov/usc.htm
using the above information.
I might answer my own question but could it be that back in the early 90s cable systems had a monopoly and you could not satellite (easily).
If you go into a grocery store, you can't buy 3 cans out of a sixpack. It seems they have the right, barring extenuating circumstances, to sell just one package, with everything, or sell every channel individually.
If lots of people don't want the channels some one will offer a specialized ala carte plan.
And because I have karma to burn...
The free market should work this out
--Joey
Last year they also had everyone trade in their analog cable boxes for digital cable boxes (no change in fees related to that). Having a digital cable box doesn't mean you have their "digital cable" service, only that you *can* get digital services. If you have the Standard service, some of the channels are digital (you can tell by the MPEG artifacts). This page lists the available channels and what category they're in. I have Standard plus the HBO pack, which is a Digital Premium item.
AOL/TW's cable business is kind of run like a franchise so there can be substantial differences between regions when it comes to prices, channels and services both for cable and RoadRunner.
These things get bundled for a reason.
As a welfare programme for arts graduates ?
Actually, if the cable is installed right, a filter blocking the analog signal is placed on your line at the pole/little green box before the line enters your home. But those don't take all that much to remove and the worst that would happen if you did remove it and they caught you, and this happend several times, is they'd come up to the house and tell you to stop taking it off.
Linux: The world's best text-adventure game.
This type of A La Carte programming has been available on TVRO (big-dish satellite) for a long time now. It's very, very cheap.
TVRO is a great way to get quite a number of channels, and many you can't get anywhere else. The only thing you can't get with it is local stuff, and you can get that over the air for free. TVRO isn't dead yet.
-twb
This stuff varies between TW regions but around Rochester, NY AOL/TW advertises that you can choose different ISPs. I use RoadRunner so naturally it's on my cable bill and I don't know how the other ISPs handle the billing or who doles out the IPs. The other ISPs *do* handle the technical support so I'd say that's a strong argument for them being your ISP. Handing out IPs is one thing ISPs do but it's not the only thing.
I'm in Detroit. I've had TW cable for many years. They may allow you to CONNECT to other ISPs (actually you can do that with ANY ISP since they're all on the Internet, duh), but as far as MSN or Earthlink being your ISP, are you paying money to TW, or are you paying money to MSN or Earthlink?
As for the pricing, I have found that pricing can be different from franchise to franchise.
My journal has hot
I think you've got it wrong -- it sounds like you'll still get forced to buy the complete "expanded" package if you want ANY of the channels in it.
The "1992 Cable Act" is actually the "Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992". It is public law PL 102-385, October 5, 1992, 106 Stat 1460.
Mostly it affects 47 USC. See 47 USC, sections 609, 521, 522, 543, 534, 535, 325, 541, 555, 552, 532, 531, 558, 533, 536, 537, 542, 544, 544a, 546, 548, 551, 553, 554, 334, 555, 555a, 335, and 521.
US Code may be viewed at The Government Printing Office (www.access.gpo.gov).
Yeah - I have satellite and only need the local channels from cable - yet I would have to subscribe to a package of like 30 channels and rent a box from them in order to get the local channels.
Last I checked satellite != cable. Unless you're just posting an offtopic message...
-dk
Here is a summary of the part of the
0 12:@@@L&summ2=m&|TOM:/bss/d102query.html|
Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992 that is being refered to:
Prohibits (with exceptions) a cable operator from: (1) requiring the subscription to any tier other than the basic service tier as a condition of access to cable programming offered on a per channel or per program basis; or (2) discriminating between subscribers to the basic service tier and other subscribers with respect to rates charged for video programming offered on a per channel or per program basis.
Gotten from: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d102:SN00
So, it says that if a channel is offered alone, then the cable company cannot say must buy something else first. However, in the case of (for example) the Home And Garden channel, they don't sell it alone, so you cannot buy it alone.
Cable Companies have actually been doing this for a while, but you have to ask explicitly for it. Even (on occassion) forcing the sales person to talk to their manager.
I would love to buy channels ala cart, though.
Ciao!
The Doctor What (KF6VNC)
Could someone please find the reference for that rule? I can't walk down to AT&T Broadband and say that some little known rule mentioned in the newspaper says they have to offer me the SciFi channel and The Learning Channel for less than the full Bronze Package Price.
For a very large part, Dish Network already does this. They have an service called "Dish Picks" where you select any channels you like at $1.50/month*channel with a $5.00/month minimum. You can also add this service to any other tiered service, forgoing the $5/month minimum (I get two channels this way, in addition to the 150-channel tier).
Not every channel is available a la carte, though, because some content providers (notably Viacomm) won't permit their channels to be broken up this way.
Also, some channels are lumped into subpackages that can be ordered alone. Only want HBO? You can do that. Same for Cinemax. Want just the five "superstations?" Sure! $5/month gives you all five of them.
The factor that has been constraining the cable companies on this front is that the content on their analog cable systems is fundamentally unencrypted. It takes the combination of encryption plus an addressable box in order to implement channels a la carte. Otherwise, the filters and traps needed to make it work would be a nightmare!
www.wavefront-av.com
I've been able to do this since cable was first introduced in my area (c.1982). It's not only OLD news (probably the oldest ever posted on Slashdot), but it's hardly newworthy to begin with, since it's not financially practical to purchase your channels a la carte unless you only want one. After that, it usually ends up costing more than it would to just buy the package that includes whatever channels you want.
Can I do this Pay-Per-View style? I'd love to buy per-channel, but can I, in the middle of the month, see something I want to watch//maybe forgot about, and buy that channel for the rest of the month? What about only buying a peice of a channel? I only watch Comedy Central for The Daily Show. If people could buy "season tickets" from their cable provider, instead of from a TiVo, how would that effect the way TV is made?
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
I was having trouble with my modem (really, I was). I called support and they ran a test. They said my signal was weak and that they would send a guy out.
They next day I went from the 13 channels I was supposed to have to getting all of my channels back (50 of them?). The only trouble is that I can't get HBO or digital cable without paying full price and I'm too cheap for that.
If somebody wants more channels, maybe this will work for them?
That which does not kill me only makes me whinier
Cable companies should be able to sell you whatever they want, and whatever makes them money. There are alternatives, and if you don't like their packages, get a dish.
I can't buy just pages 15 through 24 of Time magazine.
What are the cable deals like for Slashdot readers outside of the US?
Perhaps the biggest difference is that the dominant pay-tv supplier is satellite, not cable. The satellite system has practically completed the switch to digital, the cable systems are much more recent than the US <10 yo) and pretty much entirely digital. You usually get a free STB, but are committed to a min contract of 1 year and pay for services.
The packages are similar to the older US system as described in the article, but are sorted by content type rather than supplier. i.e. Entertainment, Sport or Movie packages rather than Disney, Vista, etc. These tend to be priced at £10-£20 (15-30 $/) per package per month for ~10 channels. The exception is the premium movie channels with cost about £8-£16 (12-20 $/) each pcm, expensive but good. They do seem to take most new-release movies within a few weeks of DVD release.
Aside from the Premium Movie Channels, the best content is available from the free-to-air BBC which is mainly distributed though both analog and digital terrestrial (UHF) transmission. They are usually also bundled with the other transmission mediums. This medium also support some national and regional advert funded, free-to-air channels of good quality.
The new kid on the block is broadband IP-DTV, this is delivered via broadband xDSL line to a STB. It differs from cable because the network topology is star and not a ring. It supports a real return channel, dedicated bandwidth to each installation. And therfore allows true content on demand (VOD), server side PVR, and real interactive content. I guess you can call it programme level al-a-carte. Each movie is about £1.50-2.50 UKP (2-3.50 $/) for 24hours, this is about the same as a movie rental.
I work on this (www.kitv.co.uk) IP-DTV project. There are a couple of others, Yes, and Homechoice.
We wanted HBO and had to upgrade to digital to get it. The classic "full basic cable" channels (below 100) are still analog, you just get them with the digital tuner box, which adds the on-screen guide.
We've had no problems with image degradation on any of the digital channels (> 100, HBO, Showtime). Strangely enough we had pretty awful reception on some of the analog stations, but with the digital tuner box the image quality has improved noticably. I'm not sure I get that, but I can only guess they've added some extra filtering or noise rejection not found in standard TVs.
Overall it's been a pretty good experience. I love the on-screen program guide.
I already get Playboy and ETC Ala Carte. I think these are also premium channels. So, this is of very little interest. I don't reall care to see movies at home. I like going outside for a change. Visit your local theatre and look at all the pretty girls you can shag!!
Well for a start I'd need both UHF & VHF antennas as a minimum - there's still some local channels that are not available over the air right now, oh and that there's only 2 - 4 years of over the air broadcast of analog tv that all seems like a waste of time.
Should I even point out that some of my uhf stations come from the opposite direction to the others so a directonal antenna wouldn't work and an omni is almost useless for tv reception.
Tell that to the cigarette companies. They are being forced to advertise the cancer-causing properties of their products -- against their right to free speech!
For-profit companies do not have the same right to the freedom of speech as do individuals. The Constitution and the Declaration of Independence are addressed to human beings, not commercial entities. The Constitution begins with the famous phrase "We the people" and the Bill of Rights amendements all specifically designate people as the recipients of those important freedoms.
This law will be totally ineffective unless the corporations are forced to inform their own customers about their legal rights and options when purchasing services from them. It's not such a radical idea -- there are plently of examples of this already. The FCC should stop its laissez faire approach to regulation and actually try to enforce the law for a change.
Cable TV A La Carte? You mean I can watch the History Channel in French now? I wonder if you get to see Marcel Marcel get his Maginot ass whupped by a blitzkrieg. Sacre bleu!
-nd
I called Time Warner in my area and gave them my list of channels. Here's my list.
;)?
ESPN2
MTV2
CNN
Comedy Central
Cartoon Network
TNT
USA
FX
History Channel
The Learning Channel
Discovery
Animal Planet
Sci-Fi
National Geographic Channel
The representative told me that I was 'wrong' and that I would have to pay $50 a month to get these, "along with over 120 additional channels". I told about the Cable Act, and she told me I was mistaken.
So there's non-compliance with the law right there. Should I press charges
Bastard cable companies.
I jsut got off the phone with AT&T digital cable.
These people are criminals.
I signed up for HBO in september - I told them that i didnt want anything but to add HBO to my existing service. I was told that there was now way that I could get HBO unless I signed up for their Silver package - at 62 per month.
I asked what it came with and she listed all this other crap - i said that I didnt want any of that - that i just wanted HBO.
Then I called today about this law - and the fact that I just wanted HBO - and they quoted a range of other packages that are cheaper that had HBO. The girl said that they didnt have these packages in September which is why I wasnt offered. I told her to find out. Low and behold - these packages were available in september, they dont knwo why i was told otherwise - and that no they could not change the package and give me credit back retro-active.
the said that if you want HBo its 13.95/month + plus 12.55 for basic + 5.00 for the digital cable box rental.
this is all bullshit. I wanted to hit them in the face with a shovel.
In the end all i got was 10 off my bill for the next year.
but I think Ill just cancel all together.
First off, the name of the original act is called the "Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act", and was passed in 1992 - it is more commonly called the "1992 Cable Act".
Here is the FCC FAQ regarding the act...
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
You sure the FBI won't come knocking? Not like it hasn't happened before.
"dope will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no dope"
They depend on the package model. This is why:
Networks make their money by packaging and sometimes producing programming to get eyeballs. The greater the number of eyeballs, the more they can charge for ad placement. Ad placement is directly responsible for their bottom line.
Those same eyeball numbers also give them power over the marketing of their programming as well. Valuable shows make or break many networks. The power of the eyeball gives them leverage when it comes to buying or selling program content or placement on their network.
Right now the Cable and Sat companies basically are selling a fat pipe. Everyone gets in, but everyone also gets out as well. There are basically three tiers. Lame Basic, the basic you should have, and premium. For almost all subscribers, you have to get the first two tiers because of the sick packaging schemes.
These two factors boost the eyeball numbers for all the networks. This plus the fact that the cable companies can localize ad placement keeps ad revenue high. The more bundling they do, the better this really is for them.
Networks compete now on a fairly level playing field. The bundles make sure that all of the networks get their chance for air time. If people are allowed to choose the channels they want, then the barrier for entry becomes a lot higher for those less popular or specialized networks. They must work harder to generate interest. Because they are not part of the default channel line-up.
Nobody involved in the money chain wants this. The cable companies are best served by selling as many channels as they can. The networks want their chance at your attention to come as easily and cheaply as possible and the ad agencies want to be able to target as precisely as possible.
Per channel subscription breaks all of this. Remember the network exists to make money, not serve your interests. Nice Huh?
Bundles help smooth revenue also. The best thing you can do for your entertainment provider is to subscribe at the top tier, get your occasional bonus pay per view and never ever call them. Wall Street likes nice smooth growth and month over month revenue.
This makes their revenue model very simple. Basically all they really care about is the number of subscribers. Their marketing efforts are more or less directed at customer loyalty (Hey we have added more channels!), pay per view and or premium content (Catch the next lame fight @ 49.95 today!), or new subscriptions. (You get your first month free and our installers will make sure your dish and antenna don't work after we are finished!)
The packages build a sense of value for the whole thing and they stay focused on that. Think maga channels for few dollars -vs- sign with us and get program x.
One other very important aspect of this goes back to the eyeball number. If you have more channels than you can use, the best way to get your moneys worth is to spend a lot of time watching. You might miss something right? After all there are so many channels, there has always got to be something on.
Packages encourage casual TV use. There is something to browse and if you browse long enough, there is something interesting.
Per channel subscription takes a lot of that away. People would then become focused on the various networks more than they are now. The result of this would be more focused television use.
With both of these comes less overall use because people would become more aware of the programming and when they get the most value from it. Nobody making money wants this either.
This also would encourage more time based competition from the various networks as well.
Personally, I feel all of these things are good. Too much aimless TV viewing is bad for all of us. The problem really is there is *zero* financial incentive to provide the sort of service that lets users exercise control of their viewing experience. It is far easier to make money when the viewer has limited choices than it is when they have more choice.
BTW this is exactly why I quit using subscription programming. Take that money, and purchase programming on media. You can watch at your leisure, don't have to worry about recording and archiving so many things, and can trade with your friends for big savings. If you are tired of it, you can resell it for an even bigger savings.
Just got the first three seasons of Stargate SG1. Now if I have a free hour, I can watch one of those. In the mood at 3AM and want to share an episode with a friend? Maybe it came up at dinner or work? No problem, do it anywhere you like whenever you like.
Blogging because I can...
Satellite providers have to carry local channels. Call DirecTV or Dish or whoever you have to see how to get them.
Having worked for a large Canadian cable company for the last two years, I can tell you with 100% certainty that this will NEVER happen until everything is digital. The way land-based analog cable (First 60 or so channels - everything you can get without a box) currently works is through a filtering system that works like this: You order all the channels : no filters You order a bundel with packs 1 and 2 and basic: the reminaing channels (pack 3) are filtered off. You only want basic: You get all four filters. These filters are done AT YOUR HOME (Inside the Grey CSE's on the side of your houses, in a PED, or on a drop line from an antenna. Each of these filters costs about 5 bucks a piece. So that means at 60 channels, if you only choose to watch CBC, Space and MTV, they have put 57 filters costing about $285 (Cdn. Dollars). Not only is it a cost issue, but these things are pretty inaccurate and can only get a range of channels properly. So if you were selling channel by channel, odds are if you bought one channel, they would have to give you 2 or 3 channels free in order to be able to receive that one channel. Another problem is actually installing the things, working with four color coded filters is a breeze. Working with 60 different filters is going to create some problems. Anyways, there's some insite into the cable industry for ya. Until they get a digital box in every home, this will not happen.
Getting RID of it a la carte is what interests me most. Man, I remember back when they used to have music on that channel. Now if I could only reprogram the damn digital tuner so it only goes to channels I have purchased, and flipping through stuff is going to me so much faster now. I think I'd have like 20 channels tops...get rid of all the damn Spanish stations I don't watch, no more Home Shopping, or weepy women's TV...it'd be heaven.
Netjak.com independent reviews of domestic & import video ga
We already have this in Canada. Out on the west coast, 31 channels were introduced on digital cable (yes, more if you're on sattelite). You can get one channel a la carte for $2/mo, 5 for $6/mo, 10 for $10/mo, and all of them for $20/mo. No, I can't yet choose to keep the older (still analog) TLC and drop Home and Garden TV, but it's a start.
There's also a lot of selection in PPV. Movies for $5 (a bit pricey I think).
What I'd like to see next is the ability to order specific shows on stations you don't subscribe to, for, say, $0.25 a show. All the TV listings are already there in the Digital cable box. I'd be more interested paying for shows than for channels. Take that marketing data to see if a show should stay on the air or not.
And for the record, I've only ordered one channel from the 31.
Yeah, after watching a number of their episodes (with my wife, yes...), both of us came to the conclusion that most of their designers are hacks, and basically suck at what they do.
We're almost always impressed with Frank's work, on the other hand. He tends to make rather "kid friendly" designs, with lots of bright colors and creativity - but for a family, that's often what you're looking for. (Once you have kids, the lava lamps, black lights, posters, and so on don't really seem appropriate anymore.)
That oriental-looking guy seems like he usually has good ideas too, for a more "adult contemporary" look.
There's one guy, in particular, who always seems like he decorates things in brown. It's awful, and he's probably the one who made the lady cry.... As I recall, he seemed to have a bit of an attitude problem too.
I figured the particle board furniture wouldn't last though... If we ever let these people redo *our* place, we'd skip that completely, or just use the particle board stuff as "templates" for real replacement furniture afterwards.
If this thing pans out, I can cut my cable subscription from 500+ channels to 50! Think of the savings! Awesome! I could finally afford a TV to watch it on! Right Now Im just listening through my stereo, and let me tell you, Leslie Neilson should not be on the air...
| - | - |
OK, here ya go, straight from the Gov (relevant sections only):
CITE
47 USC Sec.543 01/02/01
EXPCITE
TITLE 47 - TELEGRAPHS, TELEPHONES, AND RADIOTELEGRAPHS
CHAPTER 5 - WIRE OR RADIO COMMUNICATION
SUBCHAPTER V-A - CABLE COMMUNICATIONS
Part III - Franchising and Regulation
HEAD
Sec. 543. Regulation of rates
STATUTE (Partial Text)
(7) Components of basic tier subject to rate regulation
(A) Minimum contents
Each cable operator of a cable system shall provide its subscribers a separately available basic service tier to which subscription is required for access to any other tier of service. Such basic service tier shall, at a minimum, consist of the following:
(i) All signals carried in fulfillment of the requirements of sections 534 and 535 of this title.
(ii) Any public, educational, and governmental access programming required by the franchise of the cable system to be provided to subscribers.
(iii) Any signal of any television broadcast station that is provided by the cable operator to any subscriber, except a signal which is secondarily transmitted by a satellite carrier beyond the local service area of such station.
(B) Permitted additions to basic tier
A cable operator may add additional video programming signals or services to the basic service tier. Any such additional signals or services provided on the basic service tier shall be provided to subscribers at rates determined under the regulations prescribed by the Commission under this subsection.
(8) Buy-through of other tiers prohibited
(A) Prohibition A cable operator may not require the subscription to any tier other than the basic service tier required by paragraph (7) as a condition of access to video programming offered on a per channel or per program basis. A cable operator may not discriminate between subscribers to the basic service tier and other subscribers with regard to the rates charged for video programming offered on a per channel or per program basis.
(B) Exception; limitation
The prohibition in subparagraph (A) shall not apply to a cable system that, by reason of the lack of addressable converter boxes or other technological limitations, does not permit the operator to offer programming on a per channel or per program basis in the same manner required by subparagraph
(A). This subparagraph shall not be available to any cable operator after -
(i) the technology utilized by the cable system is modified or improved in a way that eliminates such technological limitation; or
(ii) 10 years after October 5, 1992, subject to subparagraph (C).
(C) Waiver: If, in any proceeding initiated at the request of any cable operator, the Commission determines that compliance with the requirements of subparagraph (A) would require the cable operator to increase its rates, the Commission may, to the extent consistent with the public interest, grant such cable operator a waiver from such requirements for such specified period as the Commission determines reasonable and appropriate.
--
Note that this the 1992 "Act" is really only a set of ammendments to the original Title 47 (Telecom act of 1934).
The relevant portion is here:
"A cable operator may not require the subscription to any tier other than the basic service tier required by paragraph (7) as a condition of access to video programming offered on a per channel or per program basis."
This means that it only applies to premium and pay-per-view channels i.e. "offered on a per channel or per program basis."
Paragraph 7 also is vague enough about the "basic" service they have to offer that AT&T (my provider) can use their "Standard" package ($37.50/mo) as the base. I called them and they said "Sure, buy the $37 standard package and we'll sell ya HBO ala carte." But he wouldn't sell me HBO on top of the $12 "Basic" package, which may or may not be legal.
Regardless, this means diddly for me, because I couldn't care less about HBO. I just want Comedy Central and Sci-Fi with my broadcast stations.
Frank can be fun...but can also be a little too "feminine" if you know what I mean.
Vern (the orinetal looking guy) does have a contempory look and feel. Usually he does something that is related to the orient or at least Feug Shui or how ever you spell it.
The last guy you are refering is most definitely Doug.
From the Edmonton Journal last month:
The West's largest telephone company is venturing into the broadcast distribution market.
Telus Communications applied to the CRTC for a broadcast distribution licence in British Columbia and Alberta. Their proposed system would initially carry 200 channels in 16 cities, including Calgary and Edmonton.
Canada's broadcast and communications regulator has set November 18th to hear interventions and applications against the move, but so far neither Shaw, Bell, nor any other major cable companies have spoken against Telus' plan.
The company's proposed distribution system would utilize Telus' extensive telephone network in BC and Alberta. This would enable consumers to pick and choose which channels they want. Currently, satellite lets you do the same thing with more channels, while cable is restricted to a tier system.
It is expected Telus would start the new service next spring.
is show it on English TV. No one would ever complain about the license fee again, once they'd seen what a crap channel it becomes when they try to be a commercial station. Endless reruns of stupid home decorating and gardening shows, Parkinson and Graham Norton. The occasional reruns of Monty and Coupling don't even begin to make up for it, and even the good shows are interrupted by barrages of inane advertising.
Since we probably all use computers here we all know how easy it can be to get around those mechanisms.
That's a non-sequitor. A Dish receiver isn't an open platform, and you have no access to the system beyond the on-screen GUI. Yeah, maybe with $500 worth of gear and alot of time you could hack the smartcard, but why bother when you can get the same thing off the internet for free? And don't tell me you have your PC (an open system) so secured that your kids can't get around your security. There are free programs and services to do that, so the attack cost is much lower here.
In my scenario I simply remove the smart card from my porn enabled tuner and its nothing but kiddie shows. By Dishs rules I would HAVE to run the same content on all tuners, pay for it on all tuners and then use the parental restriction mechanisms in each tuner to control access.
The way my Dish account works is that you pay per channel and pay a flat fee per additional receiver - you don't pay per reciever for additional channels (e.g HBO adds, say, $10 to a 3-receiver bill, not $30). They give you parental control mechanisms, but it sounds like you'd just rather have Dish manage the parental controls for you. How important is this to you really that you can't spend ten minutes per receiver to turn off the 49x channels?
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)