How about not charging me for the dozens and dozens of channels I don't use? How about instead of offering a standard, Silver and Gold preset package with tons of channels that you offer to let me pick them a la carte?
According to an early 2006 article in USA Today, the average person only watches 15-17 channels a month. Why then should I be paying for 250 channels? In the same article the FCC states that I could save 13% by an a la carte structure. They also quote a survey where 54% of Americans would rather pick and pay for their channels.
An article around the same time in the LA Times notes that Canada, Britain, India and Hong Kong all have some variation on A La Carte pricing.
Cablevision is a Company Acting Badly for not making "every" effort to keep prices as low as possible.
Posts
2 comments:
Al-la-carte pricing does NOT SAVE MONEY. The cable company has to put out almost as much money you you decide to subscribe to a paticular channel or not. The places you're describing probally have govt' controls.
>Al-la-carte pricing does NOT SAVE MONEY. The cable company has to put out almost as much money you you decide to subscribe to a paticular channel or not. The places you're describing probally have govt' controls.
Interesting. The FCC says I'll save money and USA Today says the majority want this choice.
Your proof?
Instead of the cable company gods deciding which channels to purchase and bundle, if I get to choose, then they'll have to drop those channels that don't attract viewers or change the pricing on them. Networks drop TV shows due to low viewership. Cable companies would drop channels that had few subscribers.
Post a Comment