6 ms·
We asked for a la carte TV pricing. I think this is what it looks like. I'll probably pay for a few channels and forget the rest.
by codazoda 9y ago
We asked for a la carte TV pricing. I think this is what it looks like. I'll probably pay for a few channels and forget the rest.
- kbutler 9y agoOr pay for a channel for a month or two, then drop it.
- rev087 9y agoPretty much what I would do. Netflix has such a large catalog, that I don't bother cancelling during periods when I'm not even using the service. If the content I'm interested in is spread through various services, I'll simply sign up, watch what I wanted to watch, then cancel. One month's subscription is enough for me to catch up on a season's worth of some series I like. This however creates the incentive for providers to start enforcing long term contracts for the regular price, or a much higher price for a monthly plan, in which case DVDs will be relevant again for me.
- olyjohn 9y agoThat's what I do with HBO right now. Only thing I'm interested in is Silicon Valley and Game of Thrones. Once GoT is done for the season, my account will get closed just like I did last year.
- joezydeco 9y agoSadly, cable bundling is what allowed small channels like AMC and TNT to develop programming and reach an audience that wouldn't have been possible otherwise. That's all going to consolidate into the hands of a couple of major producers (Disney, HBO, Amazon, Netflix, maybe Hulu) and that's about it.
- kthejoker2 9y agoI mean, not to belabaor the point, but when you also include: NBC/Universal/Comcast Viacom Fox Sony Time Warner BBC Plus some other deep pockets who are slowly getting in the game (Verizon, AT&T, Apple) I think there'll be enough competition even among the oligopolies to make it palatable for consumers.
- marssaxman 9y agoHow is this "a la carte"? I don't care about channels; I'd be willing to pay a couple bucks to watch some specific movie or TV show, but "you have to sign up for a monthly subscription to some corporation's arbitrary bundle of media offerings in order to get access to the one or two things you actually want to see" is pretty much the opposite of "a la carte TV".
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- bearcobra 9y agoIf that's what your looking for, it seems like you can get it from dozens of places like iTunes, Google Play, Amazon Video, etc.
- nitwit005 9y agoThe problem tends to be the pricing. The per-episode and seasonal purchase rates often seem higher than going and buying a DVD, probably due to the store taking a cut. The streaming services, or even cable TV, are much cheaper if you make a lot of use of them. The hope always seems to be to operate like a gym, where there are people paying but almost never showing up.
- cmrdporcupine 9y agoAnd the store content also come 6 months to a year or more after the original air time.
- samclearman 9y agoA la carte TV pricing was always a stupid idea. What people really wanted was cheaper pricing, which is of course not going to happen.
- ncallaway 9y agoIt's not quite a la carte. We've gone from 1 provider, with bundles to N providers. I don't mind paying for each content provider. What I personally mind is the content being spread across a bunch of different sites. I don't want to have an HBO account, and a Disney account, and a Hulu account, and a Netflix account, and an Amazon account, etc etc. I wish they'd play nicely and let one provider bill me, and take care of restricting my access to their HBO portion of their library unless I pay an addition $X/month.