A la Carte?

[pabeader]

Let's try for a poll!! (2nd attempt!!)

 

[navychop]

Two! Two! Two threads, same name!

 

[pabeader]

long time lurker, 1st time poller!! didn't know what to do. sorry about that!!

 

[Jhon69]

What do I think?.I think Roku is looking better and better.

 

[KAB]

Never never never never, ever ever ever ever, gonna be such a thing!!!

 

[jerryez]

Poll all you want, ain't goina happen!

 

[pabeader]

why won't it? it seems to me to make the most sense. would be a win-win for everybody.

 

[n0qcu]

Where's the option for not wanting??????

 

[TheKrell]

why won't it? it seems to me to make the most sense. would be a win-win for everybody.

I agree with you that it would be a big win for subscribers, but there is a reason the content providers refuse to unbundle: money. They are absolutely convinced they can squeeze more money out of us with their bundles than they can a la carte, and I believe they are right.

Which raises the obvious complaint about your poll. There is no option for what would really happen, which is an increase in cost/channel, but a decrease in overall sub cost because of the dramatically fewer channels we actually watch. So, "Yes," I'd love a la carte and I would pay more per channel. But there is no point in paying more for fewer channels.

 

[navychop]

I don't want a la carte. Sometimes I come across stuff of interest on channels I would never sub to.

 

[TheKrell]

I don't want a la carte. Sometimes I come across stuff of interest on channels I would never sub to.

Well... Of course you will always have the option of paying through the nose for all channels you might potentially want.

 

[KAB]

How do you ala carte numNuts think it would work? Dish (and all providers) would have to pay all the channels to afford your various choices...from Halmark to Logo. To get what you want, you will take it in the you know what. IMO, all of you thinking this will happen are really out of your minds. Not gonna happen.

 

[TheKrell]

Alright KAB. Why do you suppose the content providers are so dead-set against a la carte? Do you suppose they want to save us money? Come on! Their income will drop precipitously and we'll all pay a much smaller grand total because we subscribe to perhaps hundreds fewer channels. The providers know this. Why is this not obvious to everyone?

 

[KAB]

Alright KAB. Why do you suppose the content providers are so dead-set against a la carte? Do you suppose they want to save us money? Come on! Their income will drop precipitously and we'll all pay a much smaller grand total because we subscribe to perhaps hundreds fewer channels. The providers know this. Why is this not obvious to everyone?

Good Lord, Krell, do you think they will pay providers based on what you , Me, Wathcel, Bob, whomever wants to watch? THEY would not lose their A$$...and it would come back to us. So again, it's a naive concept.

 

[TheKrell]

Good Lord, Krell, do you think they will pay providers based on what you , Me, Wathcel, Bob, whomever wants to watch? THEY would not lose their A$$...and it would come back to us. So again, it's a naive concept.

You appear to have some sort of hybrid a la carte and bundling concept in your head that the rest of us do not. A la carte obviously would not work if the providers are not forced to unbundle. Dish is not standing in the way of a la carte; they have stated that they can do it. All it would take is legislation, and then we can pay for only those channels we want, and the providers can charge whatever the traffic will bear on a per channel basis.

Disney can offer me ESPN for $6/mo all by itself, and I am free to say "When hell freezes over!" I might also be one of those who pays for the kids channels at $3/mo and be happy. These numbers are all speculative until a la carte is tried, and after a settling out period when providers get real on what the unbundled market will bear.

 

[whatchel1]

Unlikely

I think that it is unlikely to happen. Possibly a hybrid of what we have now & add on a la carte would work. Say you have a package Then be able to add to it but it would take a lot of work to get it going.

 

[pabeader]

some of you get it and some of you don't. I would actually be very happy to pay more for the channels I actually want. Not only that, it would cause the downfall of all the filler like QVC and HSN and all the rest. if the loss of even one of those channels would make my bill go up $4.00 I would gladly pay it.

the joy of a la carte is it could be set up on a reverse sliding scale. the more junk you allow in your package the less you would pay per. and if you let in enough of it, you would probably be paying the same as you are now. but then it would be in your control not the providers.

am i living in utopia. you betcha. but it's a real nice place to go to once in a while.

 

[pabeader]

Where's the option for not wanting??????

wouldn't fit with the intention of the poll. i assume that everyone would like to have choice if it was available.

 

[jbrooks987]

i assume that everyone would like to have choice if it was available.

WRONG!! No way will I go a la carte. For that matter I don't see either Dish or Direct doing so either. Both companies invest a huge amount of money to serve your subscription: the reciever, the dish, the cable, the people that handle billing, and handle (sometimes) your complaints and issues to name just a few. For a la carte to support that, prices per channel would be out of sight.

 

[Mr Tony]

If it works in Canada per se, why wouldnt it work here?

In Canada you can get "themes" and some channels you can get as "pick and pay"
Here is what I mean. On Shaw Direct the themes are broken up by type.
So Sports is NFL, Golf, TSN2, The Score, Speed and OLN
Real Life has CNBC, CNN, Headline News, Discovery, History etc

Then there are some channels that I can get with a theme like ESPN Classic, Fox Sports World, NHL Net, Gol, WFN, Bio, G4, MSNBC, Animal Planet, IFC, Sundance etc. they are in package for $5 or if I want lets say NHL Net and say Bio. Instead of paying $10 I can get them for 2.99 for 2 (or if I just want NHL Net I can pay 2.49)

All cable and satco's can do it there and it works fine

Have a base package that you have to subscribe to and make everything else themes or alacarte so if you dont have kids, why pay for Nick, Disney etc? There are people that dont like sports so maybe they dont want that type of package.