Learning to Love the Cable Guy 291
An anonymous reader writes "The New York Times and C|Net are reporting on new good will gestures from big cable companies. As service monopolies increasingly became the norm, quality of service began to decline across the board. Now, though, with a number of alternatives cropping up, cable companies are beginning to realize the need to ensure customers say with the often imposing service companies." From the article: "[As] service has improved slowly as satellite providers, upstart phone carriers and cell phone companies have provided attractive alternatives. And now that cable and phone companies are starting to sell similar bundles of phone, broadband Internet and television products--known in the industry as a triple play--they risk losing subscribers forever if they do not keep them happy."
Re:Too little, too late. (Score:2, Insightful)
Cable blows (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Is the cable service TERRIBLE everywhere? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Too little, too late. (Score:5, Insightful)
But as I grew up, I just started to watch less and less. I'd occasionally find a show that was worth watching, but it was a rarity.
Now, well, I still watch some, but not really much. Mainly just Cartoon Network for certain anime shows, or something like The Venture Brothers. I'll often keep Comedy Central on just to listen to the Daily Show and Colbert Report as I do something else.
I don't know whether I've grown up (slightly) or if TV has just dumbed down (or both, or we've just become more aware of just how dumb it is), but it's hard to actually devote the effort to actually watch a show when you have better things to do with your spare time. Hell, even if it's just browsing forums for links to news articles or searching Wikipedia, I actually feel LESS insulted on the Internet than I do watching TV.
It's a rather round about way of me saying, basically, that Cable companies need to wake up and learn that they can't just overcharge people for the same crap year after year. It gets old, and some people, albeit maybe not the majority and not all at once, will find alternatives. "What do you mean if I just want 5 channels, I need to order another 45? No way." This is especially true since now even if you don't get a station for that one show you like, you can most likely just find it on YouTube or DVD.
So I just offer them this message: Stop overcharging and forcing people to buy things they don't want, or people will find alternatives, or even, gasp, go without!
Re:Too little, too late. (Score:4, Insightful)
I know plenty of very smart people (scientists, high-level civil servants etc.) who enjoy TV, even though I personally find very little of it worth watching. Brainless entertainment aids relaxation, provides conversation, or just plain alleviates loneliness - are you saying my grandmother (novelist, historian, honorary doctorate) has an IQ of 79? She can certainly write rings around you.
Re:How about just letting me buy what I want? (Score:5, Insightful)
You're still paying for them, though.
Probably not. The cable service probably would cost exactly the same with or without them. In fact, not including them might lose the cable companies some ad revenue and increase costs.
Re:How about just letting me buy what I want? (Score:5, Insightful)
The cable co is given a package of channels from the provider; the studios.
The studio says, if you want this "cool" channel, you have to take these "sucky" channels too.
If the cable co doesn't give you the sucky channels, the studio yanks their contract, and you don't get any channels.
So I assume from your post you'd be happy with an a-la-carte cable? Fine. You pay $5 and up for each of the channels you want (a common price point in most arguments). Pick your favorite 11 channels. Congrats. You are now paying MORE than I am with my 200 channels, non a la carte. But you have what YOU want, right?
Service Providers (Score:4, Insightful)
I had Verizon for years, but I pretty much had to have them. There are 2 local cable companies in my area, but neither had 2-way cable going to my house. So it was get the phone and the cable service, or just get DSL from Verizon who already supplied my phoneline. Now there are numerous other ISP with DSL, but you need to get a Verizon line, because they are all subcontracted for the fibers. So I told everyone to just forget the alternative and just go with Verizon. You only had to call Verizon, not the Cable company and then Verizon. It ended up being cheaper anyhow. Then the cable companies got moving (and so did I), and now I have 2-way cable and no phone. Its more then Verizon DSL, but now Verizon doesn't offer DSL in my area. I don't have the outages I used to have with DSL, and the cable company is there that day to fix the line if there is a problem. The cable company is one of the oldest anywhere, but its small and has good customer service.
So what has been bothering me about this whole thing? I want the service, and I don't care what the infrastructure looks like. I want to connect to the internet really fast. So I don't care if its DSL or Cable. I always thought there was a better way to deal with the infrastructure, but all I could ever come up with was government run telecommunication lines, kind of like the national roadways. A system not owned by a company, and one which any service provider could use. The problem being this smacks of communism/socialism, and even beyond the political ideals we all know what the roadways look like. I don't know what a pothole looks like on the internet, but its probably got Paris Hilton in it. The government, without another competitor, will probably take forever to fix the problems, and never completely fix it right which returns me to the previous problem.
So what are we left with? I guess I'll stick with my 2-way cable until something better comes along, because at least its better then dial-up. One day everything will be wireless and million little bits will be whizzing by my head, and give me a tumor.
Selex
Re:Is the cable service TERRIBLE everywhere? (Score:3, Insightful)
Or maybe you'll allot a 2hr time period to every service call. That way, techs that got done in 10 minutes have a 210 minute window for downtime. In which case they can drive back to your office with mileage being low on a truck, and gas being $3/gallon. Or maybe he can just take a break, you still pay him though. Or maybe it took 2.5 hours on the job because had to re-run the entire house for the customer. What then?
Re:Too little, too late. (Score:3, Insightful)
I really think its not that I just got older, or that I'm nostalgic for the shows of my youth. Shows had better writing, and *gasp* likeable characters compared to "Who wants to marry a midget?" I'd also argue that the continually dropping ratings every year tend to support my claim.
Re:How about just letting me buy what I want? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How about just letting me buy what I want? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a common and completely arbitrary price point designed to advance a specific agenda, and even if it's accurate, it's an average. The problem is the cable companies have so long enjoyed monopoly status that they have no idea how to behave in a real market. In a real market that $5 price point may become $10 for the ESPN channels and $0.10 for the Pass-The-Loot channels - they may even pay you to watch it. Of course. with proper IPTV the cable companies will become what they deserve to be - providers of bandwidth - and the only people who matter in this arguement - the customers - will get everything better, cheaper and faster. But, first the FCC has to pull their collective head out and begin trying to enforce actual markets, without monopoly status, in all their domain.
Re:How about just letting me buy what I want? (Score:3, Insightful)
For example, cable companies get paid to carry the home shopping channel and if you drop it you will end up paying more for the other chans.
Alright, then give customers a corresponding credit onto their bills for every shopping/infomercial channel I take--problem solved.
But that wasn't really the problem was it?
-Grym
Re:How about just letting me buy what I want? (Score:3, Insightful)
Who ever said that the credit had to be the same as the price as a regular channel?
Imagine if the shopping channels credited one tenth of the price as the average channel debited. With a minimum number of regular channels of even five, you'd need FIFTY shopping channels to make the net price zero. I don't even think there are fifty infomercial/shopping channels, but it doesn't matter because the providers will know and can EASILY design a system that can account for this specific case with those two simple variables..
Regardless I think it's funny how people criticize the a la carte system for being confusing or complicated, when the current cable company pricing systems are already a mess. I currently get my service from Adelphia and it's almost impossible to get even a friggin price point for the individual options out of them. Everything is all bound up in "Advantage Paks" [adelphia.com] (a double-speak term if I've ever heard one) that lack any rhyme, reason, or advertised pricing. I mean look at their FAQ [adelphia.com]. It's hilariously defensive, with questions like "Is the "New Vision of Cable" just another way to increase your rates?" or "What 'value' am I getting from these new packages? It looks like I'm going to be paying more, so please explain the "savings" that I'll be receiving." The answers to these of course explain how, by paying more, you're actually saving money, which is double-plus-good to know and certainly puts this consumer's mind at ease.
How could a la carte pricing be any more complicated or confusing than that?
-Grym
Re:How about just letting me buy what I want? (Score:1, Insightful)
No, it's the cable company keeping you from getting what you want because they're either:
1) too cheap to update their infrastructure, so that their internet customers can benefit as well as those on digital cable. Did you know some of us awful analog subscribers are using the internet? Heck, you know, if they'd do that, they could stop compressing your digital video down below VCD standards for a change!
or
2) too greedy to knock off their asinine $10 a month rental fee per box (which us evil analoggers don't have to put up with yet) or introduce one that doesn't have a 20 second delay when flipping channels. And it really would be nice to see this mythical "improved" quality of digital cable, because everything on my aunt's service looks like a VCD rip of a 40 year old VHS cassette. Satellite isn't perfect, but it's miles ahead on that front.
You have to understand that, when analog goes away, you're _not_ going to get a sudden boost in services. Hell, chances are, you're going to get less _and_ another parade of price hikes. The cable company is only interested in providing a mimimum of service at a maximum fee and I'd be surprised if they're not out trying to buy a law requiring it to be paid now that actual competition in their market's been dead and gone for so long.
And today's captcha is: AUTOCRAT
Re:Is the cable service TERRIBLE everywhere? (Score:2, Insightful)
I'd just run it like the plumber, electrician, or anyone else instead. They have no problem with trying to keep with exact appointments. None of this "sit at home for an entire day because we're so badly run we have no idea when we'll get there" stuff. I wonder how the plumbers and electricians manage to keep appointments and the cable company can't? Hmmm. maybe because the plumbers and electricians actually have to compete with other plumbers and electricians.