So much for CNN+
- Thread starter Zeester
- Start date
Netflix is losing subscribers. The streaming bubble may be getting ready to burst.
When it's all over and done with, we may actually be looking at something like ala carte TV. At least I can dream.
As long as we have ATT and Comcast, as well as any other moneyed interests, the world will suck.
IGW - you get out of IUJIM's account now mister.
+ suck. You're already paying for whatever it is then they stick you with + to pay twice
I still have an HD antenna squirreled away b/c, invariably, the cable providers will fight with the local channels and kill a football game here or there.
Of all the thing Congress could investigate, they never choose cable. I wonder why.
If the merger had happened just a little faster, it never would have launched in the first place.
The kids wanted Netflix years ago so we got it.
We wanted to watch Game of Thrones so we got HBO something-or-other.
We wanted to watch Handmaid's Tale so we got Hulu.
We wanted to watch Star Trek Picard so we got Paramount.
We wanted to watch something else, I don't even remember what, so we got Disney.
We still have directtv which I'm tempted to ditch for something cheaper like youtubetv, since we now have good internet.
I have Amazon Prime too.
I probably pay for streams I don't even know about.
Crazy.
Never even tempted by CNN+.
I get my news from Stephen Colbert. (Just kidding).
We wanted to watch Game of Thrones so we got HBO something-or-other.
We wanted to watch Handmaid's Tale so we got Hulu.
We wanted to watch Star Trek Picard so we got Paramount.
We wanted to watch something else, I don't even remember what, so we got Disney.
We still have directtv which I'm tempted to ditch for something cheaper like youtubetv, since we now have good internet.
I have Amazon Prime too.
I probably pay for streams I don't even know about.
Crazy.
Never even tempted by CNN+.
I get my news from Stephen Colbert. (Just kidding).
A
anon_mya1phvcpf5x4
Guest
We can only hope. Although if everyone doing their own streaming service is any indication, we would get about 8 channels ala carte for the same price we were getting the whole lineup of channels.
AT&T/Directv sold off Time Warner.
would they have done that if didn't facilitate or was necessary to buy something else.
Disney or AT&T/DirecTV or Amazon buying Netflix would at one time never gotten past DOJ/anti trust.
there pretty much are no rules anymore.
Last edited:
YouTube TV has been absolutely awesome. $65 bucks for TV, $80 for internet. No complaints from me.
kind of like bragging what a great deal $3.25 gas is.
or a $350 - $400 grand 3 br 2 bath house in a lot of places.
pay tv should be mandatory ala carte by all anti competitive business practices rules, but even the bundle you get shouldn't be more than $29.95 mo. tops.
and in a situation as should be the case where a public "utility" like internet is cost regulated based in the actual cost of providing it to you, it probably shouldn't be more than $19.95 mo either.
talk about being "groomed".
we absolutely are.
Mind showing your work on your $29.95 and $19.95 claims?
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
Nope. Probably just more consolidation- like always happens. It’s because of Black Rock and Vanguard.
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
Yes. In my market, the only channel we don’t have is the AT&T sports affiliate which has the local baseball and hockey teams.
If you supply a product consumers don’t want. This is what happens. It’s called Creative Destruction. That why socialism will never work, why it has to be totalitarian
Yep. Even in Georgia. (But you have to wear a University of Georgia Bulldogs sweatshirt in order to watch it.)
in 1995, about the time the industry was totally deregulated, the average expanded basic cost was just over $22 mo..
but that was inflated even then by the forced bundle.
that said, in 1995 cable in most places was still bound by technology, not capitalism, into the forced bundle.
but it quit being bound by technology long ago, yet the pay tv companies still force the bundle, which would be/is illegal in every other industry as an anti competitive business practice.
and the forced bundle is what drives up the price far more than it otherwise would be, as it allows a few select channels to leverage the entire bundle in fee negotiations....
that said, when a comparative pack was $6.95 mo in the 1980's, the cable companies thought they were printing money, and fighting and bribing local officials to get franchises at that price point.
$6.95 in 1984 dollars equates to what today?
and plenty of places in Europe get 60 plus Mbps for that or less. (though some considerably more, as govt get bought off there too).
and 60 Mbps is way more than many need.
20 Mbps is probably more than enough for HD tv.
unlike with pay tv, there isn't much incremental cost in internet delivery.
internet should be a price regulated public utility.
it isn't, because big cable/telco bought off govt.
Only CNN idiots would be stupid enough to think people are stupid enough to pay to watch CNN.
Jeebus.
The whole country is becoming an Asylum.
Jeebus.
The whole country is becoming an Asylum.
Gee, and we could have had more Poppy Harlow and Jemele Hill. . . .
poor @UncleMark … prob used some of his fitc money for it.
Meanwhile, creepy Stelter defending the disaster
Shorter IGW: "I remember when a quarter only cost a nickel."
i make an informative post, you reply with an ahole troll post.
and we wonder why social media isn't better than what it is.
because the trolls will never allow it.
nor will any of the puppet masters.
Here's your opening CNN. Go full MAGA!!!
Similar threads
