Cable Companies Squeezing Every Last Penny Out Of Dwindling TV Monopoly
from the that-won't-last dept
Over the weekend, the NY Times ran an article noting how cable TV prices had continued to greatly outpace inflation over the last few years. It notes that while there have been plenty of predictions of cable's demise, especially at the hands of Silicon Valley, it just hasn't happened... yet. But that "yet" may become more important soon. Right now, it's true that cable companies often have close to a virtual monopoly on providing television programming. While there has been some competition from satellite TV players and (in a few areas) TV over IP, the big question is really how will the internet play a role. The problem has always been that most TVs still aren't hooked up directly to the internet, nor is there an easy interface to watch internet-accessed content on the TV. No matter how expensive or annoying cable is, it does have that convenience factor, which is important when dealing with "sit back and watch" content.However, where some still see the high prices of companies without serious competition, others see opportunity. There certainly have been a few attempts, but we're seeing more and more stories every day of companies coming out with technologies that try to make it easier to access internet content on your TV. Eventually, someone (or multiple someones) will come up with the systems that not only match the convenience of traditional TV, but also add other features that cable just won't be able to easily copy (chatting about a TV show with other viewers remains a big opportunity, for example). So, if you're wondering why cable companies like Comcast and Cox are so into traffic shaping, it might have more to do with fears over the upcoming video competition from the internet than any real worries about their networks getting congested.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: cable, monopolies, tv
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
No subject
Just what I want to pay for: A bunch of people cussing about a TV show, much like they do about gaming.
Thanks, but I'll pass.
There's an important feature you're missing about cable and that's "on demand" programming. This aspect of cable is nice because it gives me, the viewer, the ability to watch a show I may have missed due to multiple recording issues or simple forgetfulness.
If you think for one second cable companies are going to sit back and simply "allow" internet content to take their "dominance" in programming, you'll quickly find out just how fast it's possible for a cable company to stream internet content directly to their set-top boxes.
Possible, given many cable companies offer their broadband internet service in addition to TV programming. It doesn't take a genius to see it's just a matter of time before the companies go "Dude! Check it! We can do it!"
Unfortunately for me, I see the day when the TV and internet are finally "married" into one entertainment package, but I'll admit I'm resistant to the joining. Why? Because it's just another damn excuse for inflated fees for content that should be free, but isn't.
It's just like having "non domestic" channels on cable. We're paying for them in addition to the ads they display for the channel's "cost" of programming.
Right now, the only thing I'm charged for accessing the internet is my cable fee. The website doesn't charge me to view content.
This will change once TV and the internet are "married".
Count on it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I already canceled my cable tv services
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cable Companies
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think what is saving the cable companies is the MPAA. These idiots have a means to get into every household in practically the world, and they are fighting it because they want to control all aspects of the ad revenue. If it would just invest that money into research instead of suing every entrepreneur out there they could theoretically reach audiences not even thought of with TV on a regular basis. The internet is handing them an audience, and they are suing everybody for it. The entertainemnt industry worked decades for what the internet is done in a matter of months.
Verizon's fios is finally in my area, but the TV segment is not. I don't know if I'm ready to fall for that, and I don't feel that is an alternative to cable. There is programming out there on p2p, hulu and even *yikes* iTunes. Not to mention we can always go to cbc/nbc and watch episodes after they are aired... There are already free opportunities out there, legal and illegal, we don't need to swap a subscription service with another subscription service. What is stopping producers from dumping the networks and starting their own website and collecting their own ad revenue? All we are going to need is some cooperation from the tele execs/producers to think outside the box.
And then there is the problem of severely outdated communication infrastructure that cable has been using. We tax payers already paid to have it put in there, unfortunately the Adephia's, TWers, Comcasts have done their best to use the infrastructure without substantial updates. I hope we tax payers don't have to foot the bill again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cable
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cable
Most of the so-called premium channels run out of ideas after midnight and show infomercials; non-premium stations just show infomercials any old time. I don't feel like paying good money just to be advertised at.
Don't get me started on reality tv... The only thing real in that crap is the word reality in the description.
Then they sometimes manage to get a good show and fiddle with it to death until it sucks and gets canceled. Or like the new Battlestar Galactica, they stretch it out over such a LONG period of time that its obvious they're milking the cash out of the cow and people lose their interest. In tv absence does not make the heart grow fonder.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's my choice, but even though my new home was also pre-wired for satellite (and cable) to all rooms, I just don't want separate sat boxes in the bathroom!
The home theater has another HD television, but only hooked up for XBOX360/HDDVD & PS3/BR movies. The TV picks up the HD channels over the regular cable wires (the little secret that the cable company won't tell you!). The master bedroom also has a small Vizio HD LCD which also picks up the QAM hi-def signal from the cable wire (but missing one of the local HD stations...)
Overall, we drop about $125 a month on HD cable/box rental/internet/phone. I'm willing to pay it...so no complaints here.
Cable internet runs at about 4MBPS, so pretty fast, too.
Soooo... as long as the $125 a month doesn't creep up to $200 a month over the next couple years, I won't complain.
I *will* complain about the crappy/tacky advertising on the Mediacom channel guide... what a pain in the @$$!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And you know, it's a weird weight that's lifted when you're not being continually bombarded with obnoxious Ads yelling at you in between snippets of 'news'...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Internet "TV"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I Call B.S.
The fact that we do not have serious, comprehensive competition in the cable market is a sad statement of our government's inability to manage competition to the consumer's benefit. Since when do mega-billion corporations need protection from consumers?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For sports content TV is still king
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cox is the worst
So I hate them, I will never upgrade because I'd rather die than give Cox one more $, and watch nothing on TV-I buy the monthly $15 membership at Hollywood Video, rent 3 DVD's/day as many times as I want each week, and just use my TV as a screen to watch the movies.
The TV was useful for cosmic events, like the debates, and Obama's election celebration.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TV INternet and telephone package
FIOS Verizen has the 3 in 1 package and I can't get it in my area. It is cheaper and much better quality.
Does anybody know of a better system, my zip is 06880?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]