Slashdot Mirror


CRTC Enforced $25/mo Cable TV Is Now Available To Canadians, But With Caveats

Deathspawner writes: Last March, Canada's regulatory agency for all things broadcasting, CRTC, ruled that cable TV providers would soon be forced to offer $25/mo packages. With enforcement having kicked-off on March 1, these inexpensive packages have now been made available. As Techgage has discovered, though, the first packages out-of-the-gate pack a number of caveats, and in some cases, are outright misleading. And, despite a simple framework to worth with, the two largest providers in the country, Rogers and Bell, offer vastly different packages, and ultimately vastly different values to the consumer.

2 of 194 comments (clear)

  1. Cost should be $0 by EzInKy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Public channels are funded by the public and commercial channels should be paying cable and satellite providers to deliver their commercials to viewers, not the other way around.

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
  2. Re:Capitalism by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It screams government intervention. Unfortunately these are government sanctioned monopolies with exclusivity agreements. Government will need to regulate on two fronts: content and infrastructure. From the content perspective demand unbundling and force a la carte. This actually will cause channel prices to drop. More people watch QVC than ESPN yet ESPN changes several times more. ESPN is guaranteed revenue from people who don't watch the channel. Remove the captive audience and ESPN is forced to compete on price. Then you will see the true nature of pricing. Cost might go up, because ESPN throw money are programming because they can pass the cost onto the customer. So they might rethink their 10 year $15 Billion dollar deal with the NFL to carry Monday Night football. Customer might balk and a massive price increase - since now you have a smaller customer base - and ESPN might go back to the NFL and actually negotiate on what they can afford.

    If government runs infrastructure - like they're suppose to do - then they can lease out the lines to companies to provide the service. Like the way the FCC licenses the air waves for TV and Radio transmissions.

    There are ways forward but the industry opposes it and politicians aren't interested in upsetting their donors.