Replies

The CBS and/or Netflix model wont work, and people will end up paying a lot more for their services, than they do now with cable service which might cost around $90 per month. I commented on the Yahoo forum about how CBS and the networks might make things more expensive than things are now... ""For $6.99 or $7.99, watching TV could end up a lot more expensive than just paying for the cable service.

I'm all for a-la-carte TV service, but at the price that CBS and others would go to, it could add up to a lot more than the single price option of cable TV. So, if CBS gets its $7, and people want to watch the other networks, ABC, NBC, FOX, that would bring up the total to around $28-$30. That's just four stations. Then, if people want the "lesser" networks, say 5 of them at $4-$5 a pop, then we're talking about and additional $25, which with the regular networks, would total some $55. That's for 9-10 stations. That's fine and dandy, but, there are many other stations, such as SYFY and cable news stations, and FX and a bunch more. If those other "smaller" networks were to go for $4 per month, and people wanted 5 of those, then, we're talking about another $20. That and the other stations which I mentioned, would bring the total for TV stations to some $75 per month. Then, you are going to get programming which is already at least a day old, where most of the programs on each stations aren't even watched by subscribers. To make things better, the TV stations would have to make "a-la-carte", even more "a-la-carte", where people only pay for the programs they want from each stations, and then, people get to pay for what they truly want, and for a much lower price.

The bigger problem for CBS and NBC and FOX, is that, their sports broadcasts wouldn't be included, which would make their stations a lot less desirable. At that point, the sports leagues, such as the NFL and NBA and MLB and NHL, would want to start their own internet sports networks, and charge some $8-10 per month. At that point, the original $90 per month cable fee will start looking like a great bargain.

I truly do want a-la-carte cable service. But, I want that to mean that, we're paying only for the stations we want to watch, and not the 150-200 that are included that the vast majority of people don't use or want. So, instead of paying $90 for 200 stations, I want to pay $30 for 10 stations. That would go a long way towards pleasing the majority of people who are tired of paying for things they don't use or need or want.

cbs/abc/&c are free over the air in uncompressed high def.

Basically, cable prices are paying for sports.

Studies show that all channels would cost $1 on an a la carte system.

However, sports channels would be about $100 per channel, per month.

The real reason the providers fight a la carte is because it will bankrupt espn.

Which would be a really good thing.

I think the small independent channels will eventually be forced to merge with, or license their content to, the big players like CBS and HBO.

It will be interesting to see how ESPN handles this evolution.

I just watch their college football and NFL programming (games and analysis) plus their World Series of Poker programming.

The other 6 months a year, I rarely tune in, so I would not be willing to subscribe on a yearly basis.

The NFL Channel is going to have political problems at some point.

The NFL depends on Congress for all kinds of exemptions from various laws and taxes.

In exchange, the NFL must give voters “free” access to many games over the broadcast networks.

If the number of “free” games goes down too far, Congress will hear their constituents screaming, and that means big problems for the NFL Network.