3 ms·
Yup. I've been cable-free for about 2 years now, and I'd never go back. Since Comcast "discounts" cable internet (which, by the way, is my /only/ high-speed opt
by seanp2k2 15y ago
Yup. I've been cable-free for about 2 years now, and I'd never go back. Since Comcast "discounts" cable internet (which, by the way, is my /only/ high-speed option besides 768kbit/sec DSL -- I have the 20mbit package or whatever they're selling it as these days) if you bundle it with basic cable, it only ends up being about $1.50 cheaper to NOT have basic cable. That said, basic cable is seriously not worth $1.50/month to me; it is worth literally less than nothing IMO. In fact, they should be paying me to watch their tripe. I'll take my payments in discounts to my cable internet, TYVM.
- pixelcort 15y agoIn some cases and at some times in the past it was actually cheaper to get the internet service when bundled with Cable TV service. In effect, some are or were somewhat paid to get it.
- tsotha 15y agoThe cable company pays a per-subscriber charge for come channels (most notably ESPN). For others (like HSN), the broadcaster pays the cable company. If they can get you to sign up for basic cable they're still making a bit of money, since all the ones they pay for are in higher tiers. If you have internet through your cable provider they already have to make sure the signal gets to your house and you're already in the computer, so adding you as a TV subscriber costs them nothing at all. I never watch broadcast TV, but when my internet connection goes down it's a handy troubleshooting tool - when I flip the TV on and see car commercials it means there's no cable break.
- herge 15y agoAlso, the 1.50$ goes to paying for lobbying efforts like the one behind SOPA.