Newcomer

Unused Channels

When will Spectrum develop a system where you can choose your own channels for a set price, depending on number of channels. Really....who listens to umpteen music channels ? I don't watch sports, so why do I have to be charged for something I don't watch ? It doesn't make sense. Any one else feel this way ?

3 REPLIES
Trusted Helper

Re: Unused Channels


Seniormoment wrote:

When will Spectrum develop a system where you can choose your own channels for a set price, depending on number of channels. Really....who listens to umpteen music channels ? I don't watch sports, so why do I have to be charged for something I don't watch ? It doesn't make sense. Any one else feel this way ?


Hi,

 

Smaller bundles known in the industry as "Skinny Bundles" may be an option in the future to combat higher programing costs.  However, because interests and program types are so diverse, no provider will be able to make every customer happy.  I enjoy the music channels.

 

The other problem is that in contracts with station owners, they HATE skinny bundles.  Disney owns ESPN.  All TV vendors at Disney's insistence, have to put ESPN on standard tier.  Even if the customer hates sports.  They also insist on having almost all of ESPN's sister channels on Digital Standard.  Sports programing is the most expensive.  If all the ESPN stations could be dropped as on option for those who hate sports, your bill would drop about $15-$25 a month.

 

Disney says no ala carte for ESPN.  Everyone has to pay about $8.50 a month approximately for ESPN,.  The station owners won't let the cable, dish, and U-Verse vendors provide ala-carte options.  That's why people pay for potentially 200-300 channels, yet watch maybe 20% of them.

 

Satch

Sharer

Re: Unused Channels

On top of everything that Satch posted, a-la-carte pricing won't get you what you think it will.  Channel owners are going to raise their subscriber fees to make up revenue for the subscribers who elect not to pay...  And what the public deems "fair" is not even close to what the content owners will want in an a-la-carte environment.  Folks in Canada already have access to it, and channels run $2.25 to $5.00 per month.

 

http://www.latimes.com/business/lazarus/la-fi-lazarus-a-la-carte-tv-channels-20170328-story.html

 

I've posted this link elsewhere, but here is what you'd pay for a channel if only the people who watched it paid for it:

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2015/05/06/how-much-would-it-cost-to-get-your-favorite-channels-a-la-carte.html

 

A-la-carte may be a double edged sword....  Charge too much, and you'll drive people away, and eventually you will not be able to pay to generate content for your channel...  I would think that many networks would go dark if a-la-carte programming became the industry standard.

 

Channel owners / media conglomerates (such as abc-Disney; NBC-Universal; Scripps; Viacom; etc.) will never want to separate their programming.  Want the Disney Channel?  You'll need to take ESPN and Freeform, too...

Highlighted
Established Sharer

Re: Unused Channels

And the worst part is that it won't matter if you "cut the cord."  You'll have to buy those same [or very similar] bundles for your Roku or any other stick.  Plus the internet provider may hit you with a streaming surcharge, now that network neutrality has been rolled back.  I'm just waiting for Trump to announce that I can somehow get a tax credit for subscribing to "The Apprentice."