Quote:
Originally Posted by fjtorres
That same content, translated to a low overhead specialty cable network like A&E, LIFETIME, HBO, SYFY, or SHOWTIME can make a ton of money off that "limited" audience.
|
Of course they can. They are charging each cable operator either a per viewer fee regardless of whether that viewer ever watches their channel or a high subscriber fee in the case of HBO.
I'd like to see them compete in a true free market where I could buy access to just the channels I want to watch. One recent report stated that a la carte pricing, which several cable companies would like to impose, would result in the demise in of 75% of existing cable channels and in the case of things like sports, especially local sports, would require viewers to pay as much as quintuple current monthly fees.
For example, I never watch sports on TV yet I pay ESPN nearly $5 every month for access to channels I do not want.
My wife watches a total of 5 channels; I never watch TV at all. Yet we pay close to $100 a month so that we can be given 220 channels that should be allowed to die. Compared to the cable channels and cable providers, the BPHs are saints, not sinners, with their pricing and business schemes.