7 ms·

You’re paying twice because the fees pay for the delivery service/infrastructure, while the ads pay for the content. They are made by different companies. You m

You’re paying twice because the fees pay for the delivery service/infrastructure, while the ads pay for the content. They are made by different companies. You might as well ask why you have to pay for Netflix when you’re already paying your ISP.

rasz 8y ago
nah, cable providers sell your viewing habits and channel spot order, you paying is just cherry on top
toasterlovin 8y ago
You’re paying twice because they figured out that they could get you to pay twice. Expect Netflix et al to do the same once they hit the end of subscriber growth.
phendrenad2 8y ago
There's absolutely no reason why my cable bill couldn't encapsulate all of the payees. None. It's just a failure to upend the status quo. "They are made by different companies"... Companies pay eachother all the time.
bootsz 8y ago
Originally cable didn’t have ads: https://www.nytimes.com/1981/07/26/arts/will-cable-tv-be-invaded-by-commercials.html https://www.nytimes.com/1981/07/26/arts/will-cable-tv-be-inv...
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  Yes, cable had ads from day one (as the first sentence of your article hints when it notes that cable was never conceived as ad free.) Originally, cable carried the exact same (ad supported) broadcast channels as were available by terrestrial broadcast; it was a way to get them when you weren't in a location with good reception (which was fairly common, at the time cable originated, places that weren't close to a major market center with a flat line of sight to it; stations weren't expending more power to broadcast than was needed to meet the big markets.) That article is actually quite odd; the then-existing cable-only channels it mentions were mostly also commercially supported from day one, the ones they report on considering commercial models are channels preparing to go online, not then-operational ad-free channels. While they point to a public expectation of ad-free cable, they don't point to any actual history outside of premium channels (that generally remain ad-free), and other than public access channels, few non-premium cable channels were ever ad-free (except PBS broadcast channels carried by cable operators, when PBS had public funding that allowed it to operate ad free, but that had nothing to do with cable.)
  - masonic 8y ago
    The ARTS Channel[0] is ad-free in the USA. [0] http://www.classicartsshowcase.org http://www.classicartsshowcase.org
intopieces 8y ago
When I go to a restaurant, I don't pay the waiter and the restaurant's food distributor on separate bills. They're bundled together as a single product.
- kingnothing 8y ago
  You do in America by tipping the waiter.
  - phendrenad2 8y ago
    It's always confusing when your restaurant booth is dark, until you remember to pay the electric bill.

rasz 8y ago

nah, cable providers sell your viewing habits and channel spot order, you paying is just cherry on top

toasterlovin 8y ago

You’re paying twice because they figured out that they could get you to pay twice. Expect Netflix et al to do the same once they hit the end of subscriber growth.

phendrenad2 8y ago

There's absolutely no reason why my cable bill couldn't encapsulate all of the payees. None. It's just a failure to upend the status quo. "They are made by different companies"... Companies pay eachother all the time.

bootsz 8y ago

Originally cable didn’t have ads: https://www.nytimes.com/1981/07/26/arts/will-cable-tv-be-invaded-by-commercials.html https://www.nytimes.com/1981/07/26/arts/will-cable-tv-be-inv...

dragonwriter 8y ago
Yes, cable had ads from day one (as the first sentence of your article hints when it notes that cable was never conceived as ad free.) Originally, cable carried the exact same (ad supported) broadcast channels as were available by terrestrial broadcast; it was a way to get them when you weren't in a location with good reception (which was fairly common, at the time cable originated, places that weren't close to a major market center with a flat line of sight to it; stations weren't expending more power to broadcast than was needed to meet the big markets.) That article is actually quite odd; the then-existing cable-only channels it mentions were mostly also commercially supported from day one, the ones they report on considering commercial models are channels preparing to go online, not then-operational ad-free channels. While they point to a public expectation of ad-free cable, they don't point to any actual history outside of premium channels (that generally remain ad-free), and other than public access channels, few non-premium cable channels were ever ad-free (except PBS broadcast channels carried by cable operators, when PBS had public funding that allowed it to operate ad free, but that had nothing to do with cable.)
- masonic 8y ago
  The ARTS Channel[0] is ad-free in the USA. [0] http://www.classicartsshowcase.org http://www.classicartsshowcase.org

intopieces 8y ago

When I go to a restaurant, I don't pay the waiter and the restaurant's food distributor on separate bills. They're bundled together as a single product.

kingnothing 8y ago
You do in America by tipping the waiter.
- phendrenad2 8y ago
  It's always confusing when your restaurant booth is dark, until you remember to pay the electric bill.