I think they should just go a-la-carte on broadcast channels.
My understanding is that the cable companies want to do this, but a tangled web of long-term agreements to carry channels have painted them into a corner.
Well, if the broadcasters get $ for cable subscriptions, broadcasters have a reason to want you to subscribe to cable. Also, the cable companies really don't want you to get into the OTA habit, since OTA has many of the things you want linear TV for and goes together with OTT like peanut butter and jelly.
Do people think there is something ritually unclean about getting OTA television? I know that a lot of people that I talk to about my OTA setup seem to think I am doing something illegal.
They probally would like to go a-la-carte, and charge a fortune for each channel?
I sometimes think it was a mistake to let cable companies put their cables up, with these long term agreements? Agreements that always seem to favor cable companies?
I've never understood these franchise agreements. I always thought if you allow one company put up their wires, you should allow multiple companies the right to use the same utility pole to put up their equipment. If said company goes bankrupt--the municipality/county would own those wires/fibers, and could sell, or lease to the next company? Or, just rip them off the poles?
I'm kinda at the point where if I chief; I would rip out all the cable companies wires? I would let any company come in and put up new cables, but the service would need to be completely free. They would make money on advertising? The advertising couldn't get much worse?
(The only good thing I heard about cable companies is in CA; there is a bill up for consideration requiring all monthly fees for cable boxes, and modems be eliminated. Or, something along those lines?)
Comments
My understanding is that the cable companies want to do this, but a tangled web of long-term agreements to carry channels have painted them into a corner.
Well, if the broadcasters get $ for cable subscriptions, broadcasters have a reason to want you to subscribe to cable. Also, the cable companies really don't want you to get into the OTA habit, since OTA has many of the things you want linear TV for and goes together with OTT like peanut butter and jelly.
Do people think there is something ritually unclean about getting OTA television? I know that a lot of people that I talk to about my OTA setup seem to think I am doing something illegal.
Cable companies are more than happy to have you go OTA+OTT. They make far higher margins on their Internet offerings than on video.
They probally would like to go a-la-carte, and charge a fortune for each channel?
I sometimes think it was a mistake to let cable companies put their cables up, with these long term agreements? Agreements that always seem to favor cable companies?
I've never understood these franchise agreements. I always thought if you allow one company put up their wires, you should allow multiple companies the right to use the same utility pole to put up their equipment. If said company goes bankrupt--the municipality/county would own those wires/fibers, and could sell, or lease to the next company? Or, just rip them off the poles?
I'm kinda at the point where if I chief; I would rip out all the cable companies wires? I would let any company come in and put up new cables, but the service would need to be completely free. They would make money on advertising? The advertising couldn't get much worse?
(The only good thing I heard about cable companies is in CA; there is a bill up for consideration requiring all monthly fees for cable boxes, and modems be eliminated. Or, something along those lines?)