WAY overpriced. I’d happily pay $3/mo for my choice of 10 channels.
I’m thinking about canceling my free TV.
I'd jump on that deal in a flash as well. Personally, I watch very little TV. Occasional sports, some news (although it's not a primary news source any longer) and I like the occasional travel or cooking show. I don't watch any and I think I could only name 1 tv series that's currently running (assuming some version of CSI is still on).
It wouldn’t work, considering cable companies pay ESPN something like $4 per subscriber. They pay local broadcast channels about $1 per subscriber.
As much as I dislike the cable companies, they make most of their money on equipment rental and premium channel subscriptions.
I ditched direct tv last month because I’m sick of paying for a bunch of crappy channels that I never watch and not getting the channels I want unless I pay for all that crap first. I have said many times before that the individual who offers consumers a pay per channel option as opposed to the ususal pay for the bundle of crap that you never watch and don’t want will put the entire industry out of business. I’m hoping the internet puts them all out of business first.
Overpriced, too many junk channels, and too many advertisements.
I signed up with Netflix in the spring. Since then I typically watch twice as much via Netflix as via Cable channels.
I have to have at least basic cable tv to get cable Internet [a company requirement that probably could be challenged in a law suit], or I would consider dropping cable tv.
Yes! I would too. A la carte would make much more sense.
5 channels- this much.
10 channels- this much.
etc.