HDTV Almanac - DirecTV Raises Rates

[GiovannaVisconti]

There is very likely something I don't understand about OTA reception. Of course I'd have to buy an antenna, but even with one I don't think trying to operate strictly OTA would be too successful in New York City. So I would hesitate to suggest to Time Warner that they disconnect the cable portion of my service!

For example, I wouldn't be able to get my Yankees games since the YES Network, along with most of the other channels I watch, operates via cable. Ditto for the MLB Network, ESPN and ESPN 2, Turner Classic Movies, and on and on.

I don't know ANYONE in this city that doesn't receive television via either cable or dish/satellite.

All that said, I do agree that at least here in New York getting the city government OUT of the cable business would benefit us, the consumers, and the companies too!

[Roger Halstead]

We seems to have strayed a bit, but the original article (the cost of cable and satellite going up with out services increasing) misses one important point. That point is the ever increasing cost "to the provider" that they have to pass on.

We've recently seen battles between stations/mini networks and both the cable and satellite companies. The fact is satellite and cable companies are having to pay more for the same stuff which means raising their prices just to stay even. Then we (naturally) cut back on channels or services and that again cuts into the profit margin of said cable and satellite companies. What with legitimate inexpensive sources for movies and music the entertainment industry rails about lost profits and with their background we know they will try to wring as much as they possibly can out of the cable and satellite companies. Next contract time will probably see a substantial change in the price of NetFlix.

In the end the prices to all of our providers will be going up. How much it will go up? Who knows, but I think the cable and satellite companies are caught in the middle. Of course they too are going to do all they can to maximize profits so prices can go up, or quality of service can go down... or both. In addition the cable companies have much more hardware out in the elements that requires maintenance.

[regman]

IMO they're jacking the rate so that the CEO can insure he gets his golden parachute when internet TV takes it all away or when FIOS is a reality everywhere. We have 5 choices in the Bay Area, Comcast, ATT Uverse, Dish, Direct and OTA.

It remains to be seen, however, whether the bandwidth will crash when all of these new internet ready HDTV's are actually in use.

Anybody know of a good set top DVR for OTA programming?

[GiovannaVisconti]

Hi, Roger,

Yes, I guess we did stray from the original point. But it was the original point that led me to muse about an antenna and OTA reception to try to circumvent the ever-rising cost of cable.

I think your last post is excellent in describing the position in which the cable/dish companies continue to find themselves. Your post lays out many reasons for the constant rate increases simply and straightforwardly.

Here in New York, however, everything you discuss is magnified many times over by the involvement of city government picking winners and losers and determining who can service what areas of the city thus eliminating any competition between cable companies. Getting the city out of the equation would be a big first step toward lowering rates.

It won't happen, however, and ultimately the city will use force to stop the cable companies from raising rates. Then, what companies can do so will leave the market. Those who remain for whatever reasons will offer fewer channels and ancillary services, etc., etc., etc.

Perhaps it has to reach that point before any fundamental changes in attitude and mindset can be made.

[jose39]

Move

[Roger Halstead]

Unfortunately the migration is "to" the cities and "burbs" and not from. This gives the ones in control more of a captive market and even less incentive to give up even a little of that control.