Cutting the Cord? Time Warner Loses 184,000 TV Subscribers In One Quarter 392
Mr D from 63 (3395377) writes Time Warner Cable's results have been buoyed recently by higher subscriber numbers for broadband Internet service. In the latest period, however, Time Warner Cable lost 184,000 overall residential customer relationships [Note: non-paywalled coverage at Bloomberg and Reuters]. The addition of 92,000 residential high-speed data customers was offset by 184,000 fewer residential video customers in the quarter. Triple play customers fell by 24,000, while residential voice additions were 14,000.
They tried to raise prices 20% unnanounced (Score:5, Insightful)
And I asked myself quite reasonably, "Why the fuck do I have cable TV?"
Re:They tried to raise prices 20% unnanounced (Score:5, Informative)
Exactly. Minimum basic cable price (if I don't want to sell my entire soul to the cableco) where I am is $39.48 + $3.99 for a converter box + 13% taxes + some other silly fees I've forgotten about (LPIF?), every month. Ends up about $54. As encouragement for me to never sign up again, they'll punish me with a $49.99 one time bonus fee.
Primewire, netflix and even sometimes the sites for the stations themselves gives me all the content I need (no hulu in my country). I'd actually pay $20 for what I watch on top of Netflix, but it has to be equally convenient and unlimited to what I get now, and typically anything I've seen isn't. Basic cable is a joke.
Cable TV can DIAF.
Re:They tried to raise prices 20% unnanounced (Score:5, Informative)
They blatantly lie and claim that the box is "necessary" "because digital", but it isn't. The real reason they want you to use the box is because of their unilateral insistence on encrypting even the signals that you'd otherwise be able to get unencrypted from an antenna anyway, so that they can charge you a rental fee. But even then, it still isn't necessary because you can get a CableCard instead.
When I had cable TV (only because the TV + internet bundle was cheaper than internet-only that year), I refused the box (and refused to be charged for the box) as a matter of principle.
Re:They tried to raise prices 20% unnanounced (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:They tried to raise prices 20% unnanounced (Score:4, Interesting)
I was in the same boat you were. I was a very happy TiVo customer here in Canada, until we moved to an HDTV.
The funny thing was having to try to convince the customer service woman at TiVo that no, I couldn't upgrade to TiVo HD. The concept that I couldn't get a CableCard from my local provider was so alien to her that I had to explain it several times (and even point her to TiVo's own webpage explaining why TiVo HD wasn't available in Canada). Even then I don't think she was quite convinced.
I guess that TiVo had so few Canadian customers that she really hadn't had to deal with the situation before. I still miss out old TiVo; the Motorola box we got from Shaw is great for 1080p video and Dolby Digital audio (neither of which our TiVo 2 could handle); but the user interface and software absolutely suck compared to the TiVo. It's always trying to do dumb stuff, like start a new scheduled recording on the tuner I'm using to watch something, even though nothing is being recorded (or is scheduled to record) on the other tuner at the time; menus you can't move back up from (even if you're several screens down, if you need to go up one menu you frequently (but not always!) have to exit entirely and start over again, drilling back down to where you wanted to be), not being able to filter out all the myriad of channels we don't get form the listings (I've simulated this by setting up a "favourites" list containing only those channels we get, but the way the interface is setup managing this when a few channels change often means I have to remove the favourites list and start over again), and ugly, ugly on-screen graphics (crappy fonts with no smoothing, no built-in upscaling for SD channels, so the entire UI changes to a more compressed version to fit within 480p, etc.). I could probably go on all day. I believe they have better boxes available now, but as I had to buy this one, I don't see it as worthwhile to "upgrade" to another non-TiVo box that is probably equally crappy.
Yaz
Re: (Score:2)
Re:They tried to raise prices 20% unnanounced (Score:4, Informative)
They blatantly lie and claim that the box is "necessary" "because digital", but it isn't. The real reason they want you to use the box is because of their unilateral insistence on encrypting even the signals that you'd otherwise be able to get unencrypted from an antenna anyway, so that they can charge you a rental fee. But even then, it still isn't necessary because you can get a CableCard instead.
When I had cable TV (only because the TV + internet bundle was cheaper than internet-only that year), I refused the box (and refused to be charged for the box) as a matter of principle.
They are prohibited by FCC mandate from encrypting over the air channels, those must be broadcast "in the clear", and with the copy protect flag set to "copy freely". You just need a tuner capable of grabbing Clear QAM signals to view it (some TVs but not all). If you see a violation of this you can report it to the FCC and they'll get in big trouble. As for the rest of the channels, Time Warner Cable is objectively the worst cable provider, in that they encrypt ALL channels (excluding the Discovery Channel) that they aren't required to decrypt by law. They also set the copy protect flag to "copy once" on all channels except those they are required not to by law. Comcast is a better TV provider than Time Warner Cable, and that's saying something. Comcast uses the copy protect flag more sparingly, and offers more Clear QAM channels. If the merger goes through the only silver lining is that my TV will get better (while my Internet gets far worse... fucking data caps should not exist on wired broadband).
Re:They tried to raise prices 20% unnanounced (Score:5, Informative)
Nope. [fcc.gov]
Also, nope. In my area, Comcast started encrypting everything, including over the air channels, over a year ago.
LOL, you poor, naive fool. You only think that because you haven't experienced the Hell that is Comcast "customer service." I've filed multiple BBB complaints. I once almost got arrested by the sheriff's deputy Comcast hires to guard their office from irate customers -- that's how bad they are!
Comcast is so bad that I've even resorted to lobbying local politicians to try to kick them out of my city.
I tried. In my case, Comcast started encrypting (some of the) OTA channels weeks before sending the notice required by Title 47 Section 76.630 (a)(1)(v) (look it up!). I filed a complaint with the FCC, and heard nothing whatsofuckingever.
The FCC is in Comcast's pocket.
Re:They tried to raise prices 20% unnanounced (Score:4, Informative)
Re:They tried to raise prices 20% unnanounced (Score:5, Insightful)
Every year or two?! What are you talking about?
In the decade or so I've used cable Internet, I've only owned two cable modems, and I only had to get the second one recently because Comcast forced me to upgrade from DOCSIS 2 to DOCSIS 3. I expect my current modem to last at least another decade (or I would, if I didn't expect to switch to Google Fiber sooner).
There haven't been enough DOCSIS versions invented to necessitate you upgrading your modem anywhere close to yearly!
Re:They tried to raise prices 20% unnanounced (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:They tried to raise prices 20% unnanounced (Score:5, Interesting)
When the government put out regulations where companies couldn't use lead-based solder in consumer electronics products anymore (it's still widely available for private purchase), all electronic devices began suffering significantly shorter operational life.
We should note that the RoHS (pronounced "roe-hass") regulations do not apply in the US, but they're a major hassle in the EU. And yes, the lead-free solder is a real pain in the ass to use and leads to a lot of junction failures. A local community college even offers a special class on how to solder under RoHS.
On the upside, you can pick up a lot of "failed" commercial products and with a quick re-solder with real solder you can bring them back to life cheap.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
We've revived many a printer (newer hp laserjets like the 1320 for example) this way. You remove the controller card and bake it in the oven for a few minutes. Once re-installed, they work like new.
Re:They tried to raise prices 20% unnanounced (Score:4, Informative)
That's what I had done until Comcast started encrypting everything.
The FCC sold us out [fcc.gov] about two years ago.
Re:They tried to raise prices 20% unnanounced (Score:5, Interesting)
Local cable company recently swapped to a completely digital signal so everyone had to rent a new tuner box for every TV in their house (at something like $10 a month each). We stopped using cable but my dad kept with it.
One thing he noticed is his internet connection went to (even more) shit after the change. So he disconnected all the TVs yesterday and wired it so the cable signal just goes to the modem.
3x the download speeds and half the ping time, plus he loved not having to deal with constant commercials as he watched the news on his computer.
Cable companies are shooting themselves in the foot trying to squeeze a couple extra drops of revenue out of people.
Re:They tried to raise prices 20% unnanounced (Score:5, Interesting)
A lady at work the other day didn't seem to know that one could still receive over-the-air broadcasts for television. I wonder how many people don't realize this and are paying for TV that they don't want or need.
Re: (Score:3)
I've been toying with the idea of setting up a HD external to the home antenna, and hooking it to a MythTV box for local HD stuff.
And with Netflix and Amazon Prime that would cover about 95% of what I usually watch. I'm pissed that there are really no cooking shows anymore on FoodTV or Cooking Channel, just contest and reality crap.
The only thing I'd miss from my cutting the cord...are the cable new networks. I figure between watching MSNBC, FoxNews and C
Re:They tried to raise prices 20% unnanounced (Score:4, Insightful)
Only if you want news biased to a conservative, American ego-centric sources.
If you think you're getting the truth by watching those three sources, you're sadly mistaken.
CNN hasn't been an objective source of news for over a decade now. Fox never was.
Add some international stuff to your news, because with only 3 US sources, you're pretty far from objective truth and balanced coverage.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Well, I"m not that interested frankly, in the news of the world for the most part...why would I?
I don't expect that
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But really....I watch a swath of new channels from the right (Fox) to the far left (MSNBC) and the more moderate ones....and try to get my own sense of balance between all of them.
heh heh MSNBC far left HAHAHAHAHAHA
This is what you get when you depend on video for news, you can think that centrists are leftists
Re: (Score:3)
Seriously? You thank Rachel Maddow, and Al Sharpton are centrists??
Moving the goalposts, from network to individuals. MSNBC is more than Maddow and Sharpton. Logical fallacy detected, comment invalidated.
Oh look, it's only been 1 minute since I last posted a comment. Slashdot is shitting on itself again.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know if I would say far left, but msnbc is most certainly a left leaning channel.
Sure, for the USA. But there's plenty more to the left of MSNBC in the world. It's just not well-represented in American media.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Who gives a damn about what is right or left in the rest of the world, eh?
Yeah, what could we possibly learn from the rest of the world? We know everything!
That isn't germane to the conversation here.
You can't possibly believe that, can you? You must be trolling. Because if not, the alternative is that you are a gigantic idiot. Wait, I've seen your posting history. You may not be trolling. But if you aren't, your use of the word germane in this context may be the funniest thing I've seen all year.
Re:They tried to raise prices 20% unnanounced (Score:5, Insightful)
Because understanding the difference between what get said inside the echo chamber that is America, and what gets said outside of America might actually help you understand that Americans only see the world through their own lens. And they're frequently clueless as a result.
If you think Fox and MSNBC define the right and the left ... then you really are a clueless American. What passes for 'left' in America is pretty severely to the right in the rest of the world.
Not true.
Know all those pesky little wars you've been getting into over the last few decades? The reaons, rationale, and historical context for all of those are pretty much entirely different inside and outside of the US.
Americans think "Oh, we went in and saved the world". The rest of the world think, "Oh, here come the naive fucking Americans who think they're saving the world, but really doing sound-bite foreign policy with no real understanding of the issues".
The next time your government tells you you're going to war for a reason, you might actually know if it's a lie.
Despite claims to the contrary, the US does not intervene on moral, humanitarian, or principled stances ... they intervene purely on the basis of strategic oil, and what plays well in the domestic market.
America isn't the champion of democracy and freedom they like to think they are, America actively undermines those things elsewhere in the world.
And then when they do, they often impose conservative, American, Christian values on their aid ... like allowing Monsanto corn to be given as aid, with the expectation starving people won't keep seeds ... or disallowing any form of access to birth control even if it would benefit poor women around the world ... or any number of reasons.
America isn't nearly as good or perfect as the people who live there like to think.
And part of the problem is you haven't got the slightest idea of what is happening in the world around you.
At a minimum, you might understand the reasons why people dislike you. And then you might actually be collectively aware enough to stop being such assholes.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And precisely why would I give a fuck what is "right" and "left" in other parts of the world?
If I wanted to live in a left leaning, more socialist part of the world, I would.
I prefer the US.
I will agree, the US and its polices aren't the "good guy" ones of the past, I blame that on corporate money takeover of our
Re: (Score:2)
You don't have to catch 'em all. Your life will go on if you miss some TV.
As for cooking shows, PBS has a LOT of shows on, and many are quite good.
Re:They tried to raise prices 20% unnanounced (Score:4, Insightful)
I actually feel like I gained something by the number of commercials I'm avoiding, far in excess of any entertainment possibly lost by cutting the cord. Occasionally if we travel or we're at someone's house and the TV is on, my three-year-old daughter asks me what's going on when there's a commercial and the show isn't playing. I think it's kind of awesome she's confused by them, rather than considering them part of life.
Occasionally I'll go over-air to catch a football game, but I've hit the point where after seeing the same commercials five times in fifteen minutes, I get bored and wander off, and then forget to come back for twenty minutes, invariably at another commercial break, and wander off again. It's a refreshing new way of life.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? They even fucked up the Cooking Channel? Damn.
On the bright side, PBS has cooking shows, Good Eats is on Netflix now (not to mention Youtube, of course), and Food Network show episodes are available on their website.
LOL. If you want actual news, subscribe to your local paper.
Re: (Score:2)
We're on the edge of cord cutting also. We do watch some shows on cable TV, but those few shows could be replaced by purchasing them from Amazon VOD. (Or waiting a season for them to come on Netflix or Amazon Prime.) The main reason we haven't cut the cord yet is because our cable company gave us a good deal ($85 a month). If we went to Internet Only from Cable + Internet, we'd save $50 a month. After you factor in purchasing shows we'd want to keep watching, we'd be down to about $35 a month savings.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I cut the cord four years ago. When I moved into my new place I had nothing but trouble with cable (half the time half my channels wouldn't work.) Umpteen tech visits later, I even had three different techs say the cable from the street to my house was damaged (underground cabling in my neighbourhood.) I was actually injured and basically bedridden at the time and it was basically the only thing I could use other than my laptop occasionally (weight on my legs = killer pain.) Anyway, they didn't want to fix
Internet alone is more expensive than Internet+TV (Score:2)
Re:Internet alone is more expensive than Internet+ (Score:5, Insightful)
Which just makes me so glad that I don't sit on my ass watching other people exercise for entertainment.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Oddly, mine doesn't. Charter vigorously advertises their triple play for $90, emphasizing with each ad that internet, tv, and phone are "$30 apiece" while internet alone is $50. I've told them repeatedly I've got no interest in phone, but if they could do internet + tv for $60 or even $65--basically just the price point they established for themselves--that I'd take it, but no, internet + TV is also $90, identical to the plan with the phone. I get the bulk discount, but that's just irrational.
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't had cable or satellite since 2009, and it is still a weird experience when I encounter it again.
Good lord what a load of crap on all those channels...
What I ask myself is, "why the fuck do people have cable or satellite?"
Re: (Score:2)
Well, they could be the remaining populace of invertebrates who like the reality shows that permeate 97% of cable television.
300 channels, and they're all variations on "look at these stupid people act dumb and laugh as if you're better than them."
Re: (Score:2)
The main reason I have cable tv is that is my areas best/affordable way to get internet.
I would welcome alternatives to Cable in Rural areas.
Their service is overpriced crap (Score:2)
Anyplace people have an option they take it. As far as I can see they only have one legitimate purpose which is to encourage distrust in the local governments that so egregiously ignored the needs of their communities.
No surprise here (Score:2)
The writing has been on the wall for several years now. Traditional TV viewing is going to be extinct in the near future. Too many people want to move to mobile devices, have video on demand, and other options. The cable/distribution companies need to get on board or die with the old business model. There are at least a few signs that they're starting to understand that.
Re:No surprise here (Score:4)
Yes, but their "solution" seems to be lobby Congress to preserve their sixty year old business model, not actually innovate.
Re:No surprise here (Score:5, Insightful)
They didn't get where they are by innovating.
They got there by lobbying Congress in the first place.
Re: (Score:2)
Not really much congress can do about this one (short of requiring everyone to pay for cable TV or incur a tax penalty).
People will simply no longer put up with ever-increasing prices for enormous bundles of services they don't want. How often do we hear people bemoan the fact that they watch three channels but pay for three hundred? Well, at some point, people realize that they
TV licence that funds the BBC (Score:2)
Not really much congress can do about this one (short of requiring everyone to pay for cable TV or incur a tax penalty).
Great Britain and several other countries do exactly that.
Re: (Score:3)
Or maybe "Traditional TV viewing" is coming back in that people are going to over the air for local channels/major networks and internet for everyhting else. At least that is what I see with my peer group.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. But that is precisely the kind of TV that is the easiest to automate with a DVR. The tech is nice and simple and DRM free. Anyone can do it. There are no stumbling blocks that make it the sole domain of Microsoft and Tivo.
DVR patents (Score:2)
There are no stumbling blocks that make it the sole domain of Microsoft and Tivo.
Not even TiVo's patent war chest?
Re: (Score:2)
See sports in person (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What I think should happen, is that if viewers still are willing to accept the idea of timeslots like television broadcasts have, that once the content goes up for broadcast, then that content remains accessible from that point forth, with the ability for the content provider to change-out the ads between acts. There's no reason to have to wait for another broadcast window or to have to delay allowing on-demand viewing of
Re: (Score:2)
There's really no reason for content distributors to stop making content available.
Then explain Disney's periodic sales moratoriums on copies of its films. And explain its continuing sales moratorium on copies of the film Song of the South.
186k suscribers lost (Score:2)
That's really weird that TW lost 186k subscribers last quarter, because my project came in $186k overbudget last quarter. Coincidence?
Re: (Score:2)
The Internet Has Better Porn (Score:5, Funny)
"Cutting the cord" (Score:3)
My Internet still has a cord. I'm fine with that.
Also, those so-called "cord cutters" are probably still buying their internet from Time Warner.
Re: (Score:3)
Look, I'm not a lover of cable companies, and I think they regularly and historically have engaged in some really shitty business and billing practices. But at some point, displacing all of their consumption from TV to Internet, whilst utilizing the same infrastructure (and clamoring for infrastructure upgrades), is going to create pressure to increase Internet prices.
There seems to be a lot of people here who would rather see them drop dead, and again, I can understand they're no
As a current TW customer this does not surprise me (Score:2)
Cable: Time Warner (available but sucks)
AT&T Uverse (available but sucks)
Verizon not available
Comcast not available
Other cable company n
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Satellite Internet can be very expensive. Wireless Internet (Verizon Wireless, AT&T, Sprint, etc) typically comes with a hard cap (e.g. 10GB) and is very expensive (especially if you get overage fees). Just try watching a couple of Netflix videos every day on your cell phone connection and see how quickly you hit your cap.
Some other /. users recommend moving (Score:2)
not offered in my area
Apparently sglewis100 [slashdot.org], an AC [slashdot.org], Zero__Kelvin [slashdot.org], and allquixotic [slashdot.org] think moving to an area with better Internet options is worthwhile.
Cut the cord in 2010 ... have not looked back (Score:2)
Cable TV provided so little value for the money all I've noticed is the thousands of dollars I've saved over the years. With Netflix, Amazon Prime and an antenna, I've not really missed anything of value.
I'm just waiting for the other shoe to drop when the last bastion of why anyone would pay for cable -- live sports -- starts to have an effective streaming model that Joe Sixpack can easily use. The current model with blackouts and IP restrictions that require VPNs and other nonsense throw up too many barri
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe Netflix could branch to live content. That would become interesting.
Perfect timing (Score:4)
I just got off the phone ending my cable subscription when I saw this post. Perfect timing :)
The reason is different, though. While I am not a customer of Time Warmer (different country), I realised that I wasn't needing it anymore. Or more precisely: there's nothing of interest on it for me. I watch perhaps 3 hour a month; the few things I want to see (mostly news, a few background programs) I can watch on free-to-air. So I'm saving about $20 a month now, which I might use for a cinema ticket or so.
I'm sure I'm not the only one... Perhaps there's more to cable-cutting than just rising cost.
I welcome the Death Spiral (Score:5, Interesting)
I am rooting for a death spiral. There are so many cable channels that would die a very quick death in any sort of ala carte system where they actually had to compete. The system has been cable system has been setup to extract maximum dollars, while providing very low quality (maximizing profit). I'd much rather see an ala carte system with a few very good premium channels, along with some scrappy quirky channel, and let the invisible hand slap down the rest. I want to be able to get HBO without ESPN, QVC, TLC,CNN, Fox News, etc. Get it down to a handful of good channels that i pick out for $20 a month and I might sign back up.
For now I watch a few things on Hulu and Netflix, and buy dozen or so DVD's a year. I am pretty happy with what I get for the money, and I am very glad that ESPN doesn't get one red cent from me.
Inevitable (Score:3)
NBCNews.com, WANE.com, Weather.gov, etc. (Score:2)
How do you get your news , both local and national?
Local and national news channels tend to run web sites. Is it that much less convenient to read instead of watching? For local weather, I key a ZIP code into the National Weather Service's web site. Besides, local and national news can be received OTA periodically throughout the day.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, in most cases...YES.
I do tech for a living, and I don't know about you, but I'm reading pretty much 99% of my day...staring at a computer all that time.
Before and after the day job...I kinda prefer to get away from a computer screen for a bit....and relax and watch and listen.
I suppose if your job doesn't have you reading a computer screen your full day, it might be more convenient t
No cable, no problem (Score:3)
I haven't had cable for eight years. Haven't missed it one bit. The very idea of letting TV schedule when I can sit and watch is ridiculous. Same goes for a DVR, where you have to both know about a show before it airs and set up the DVR to record it. Netflix has a terrible selection here in Canada so I tried that for whatever the trial period was and then ditched it. Turns out I ALWAYS have better things to do than watch TV, and when I give in to the urge I just hit up a torrent site.
Re: (Score:3)
>> Same goes for a DVR, where you have to both know about a show before it airs and set up the DVR to record it.
Not since the 90's.
I just type in program titles and keywords (e.g. the name of my home town) I'm interested in into my mythtv box and it records matching shows whenever they air on any channel. I haven't actually set up a recording for months.
Re: (Score:2)
But you have to set it up BEFORE the show airs. Say you bump into a coworker on Monday who says he saw a great show the day before. You can't get it because you didn't know about it on and record it. It's ridiculous.
Re: (Score:2)
The point is that you're constantly missing stuff that you've payed for, even with a DVR.
Re: (Score:2)
While the selection of Netflix Canada still is nowhere near par with the U.S.A. version, it's a whole lot better than it was at the beginning. And for the price they're asking, it's still better than renting half a dozen DVDs per month.
Re: (Score:2)
It costs more and has lower selection and usability than ThePirateBay.
Re:No cable, no problem (Score:4, Insightful)
1. Netflix costs more than The Pirate Bay: true
2. Netflix has a lower selection than The Pirate Bay: true, including and especially the latest releases and obscure titles (if they're still seeded)
3. Netflix has less usability than The Pirate Bay: false*
* Netflix is just plain easier. I can sit down in front of the TV, start my AppleTV, navigate to something I want to watch, click play.
To do the same thing with The Pirate Bay, I'd have to sit at my computer, search their website, filter out all the weird containers like DivX and MKV, try to find a non-HD file that would take multiple hours to download, make sure the MP4 version I choose has subtitles and will play on my AppleTV, download the file, wait for at least 30 to 60 minutes for the download, add to my iTunes library and then finally watch the movie on my TV. That's nowhere near as convenient as Netflix.
Re: (Score:3)
Half the stuff in that list is the fault of the Apple TV, not The Pirate B
Their customers are lucky... (Score:3)
TW customers should be breathing a sigh of relief that the merger didn't go through; Comcast customers are disappointed that they missed out on a possible chance at a better product.
That said, there is still almost nothing on TV worth watching. This is becoming increasingly a fault of the cable companies as they go about buying up networks so that they can provide various degrees of exclusive content.
Re: (Score:2)
"TW customers should be breathing a sigh of relief that the merger didn't go through; Comcast customers are disappointed that they missed out on a possible chance at a better product."
Are you posting from the future?
Bang for Your Buck (Score:2, Interesting)
Cable TV is pretty expensive for what you get, it's full of ads you can't really choose what content you want, etc. It has to become competitive to survive.... well that's how it should work but then the music industry was also faced with this conundrum ~15 years ago and I think they chose to lobby their way into survival, I expect the same song and dance from Cable.
I think the media companies might be too stupid (Score:4, Interesting)
We had a baby in 2010, cut the cord because we didn't want to contaminate him will all the bullshit. Sports is the only thing we remotely miss..
This is very easy to stop if they want, cut out the reality shit, produce quality content. Make the news news again with a bit less opinion. And by quality content, I'd say figuring out Law and Order and CSI and then making n versions of those shows in different cities probably isn't good enough. No more American Idol type crap. Like real quality entertainment, like dramas and comedies. I'd gladly pay for a news channel and 5 to 10 channels with good quality stuff on it.
That takes money, takes risk and takes some intelligence to try to suss out the good from the bad. Thus I predict it won't happen, not from the current batch of media and distribution companies. They're too fat and lazy and used to just cashing checks.
Re: (Score:3)
I had a child roughtly the same time, at ~3 yo his absolute faviroute thing is watching Monster trucks on you tube..... We Also do all the TMBG Kids videos. He loves "I am A Paleontoligist" It't whoi I am It's who I am It's who I am!
Youtube + Netflix + Amazon (Score:2, Informative)
TV is going through a wierd shift right now.
It's both the very best it's ever been and the very worst. There are a handful of very very very high quality shows. Honestly the most well produced, well written, entertaining, amazing video ever made and rivals even the best cinema.
The rest is crap. Really really really crap. Repulsive, base, cheaply made, immoral, sensational, manipulative, pandering shlock that insults your intelligence. Well, it's not all as bad as Fox News but it's not much better either.
At
Why the surprise? (Score:4, Informative)
cool (Score:3)
> Time Warner Cable lost 184,000 overall residential customer relationships
Couldn't happen to a nicer company.
Re: (Score:2)
Funny thing is we would have gladly removed all tv services but they would have charged more for the service going Internet only.
This is the only reason I have cable TV service, too -- I haven't even hooked up the cable to my TV. I think that's why they do this -- it helps them artificially boost the subscriber numbers.
Re: (Score:2)
Funny thing is we would have gladly removed all tv services but they would have charged more for the service going Internet only.
Question: Is this legal/lawful? What chance [of success] do I have can if I filed a law suit against this kind of practise?
Re: (Score:2)
You see all sorts of businesses giving a discount for bundling things. What about those meal deals at McD or BK or Taco Bell? Are you wanting to sue them too?
Why would it be illegal, this is a long time tried and true method used by companies selling products.
Re: (Score:2)
Bundling is one thing, but pricing the bundle so that the bundle costs less than one of the items is another. It gets even worse when that one item is something that you hold a monopoly on.
Cable companies, in many areas, hold a monopoly (or duopoly) on Internet access. Want high speed, wired Internet access? You'd better get used to dealing with your cable company. However, the video services area has competition. Not just from Internet video providers (Netflix, Amazon, YouTube, etc) but from Satellite
Re: (Score:3)
But why would thhey do it? Remember the old question "Who benefits?".
Thing is, once they have the cable to your house, providing TV access over TV+Internet really costs them no more. The only difference is the number of subscribers reported to their suppliers and advertisers.
My assumption would be that their licensing costs + advertising revenue per customer results ina net profit per customer to them....so in essence, you agreeing to recieve the service means that the cable service is actually subsidizing
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's stupid as well but why would it illegal?
I guess price fixing? I'm not sure if that applies since the cheaper rates are usually part of a bundle deal that has a lifespan of 6 months to a year.
...like a house of cards. Checkmate! (Score:2)
Dumb is unprofitable (Score:3)
I long for a new era of "Dumb Pipe"/quote. Dumb is unprofitable, and as long as regulators see home Internet as a luxury and not a necessity, home Internet won't get regulated like the public utility it is.
Re: (Score:2)
I want to believe you, but failed to find anything online about this. Citation please?
Offline for the rest of the month (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
CTHULHU 2014!
Re: (Score:3)
No, he's referring to voting third-party.
(Don't worry, you can still vote for the lesser evil in the runoff.)
Re: (Score:2)