Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.tivo (
More info?)
Sean,
I changed to DTV about three years ago because of several reasons. First of
all the down time for cable was getting out of hand. The second reason was
the cost was getting out of hand. The third reason was because the poor
customer service and attitude was getting out of hand. They all just got
worse as time went on. Cable chased me away!
When I started with cable I took down my big expensive antenna and had them
hook me up. Cable was 25 cents per month for limited basic and that was not
a special offer either. That went to $0.50 in a year. Next to $5.00 in
just over a year.. next it went to something like $14.00 and so on. In a
period of about 10 years it got up to where I was spending about $50.00 a
month or so before the charges for HBO. I ask you, what other business can
raise rates that aggressively and still remain in business? With this past
history, how long do you thing it will be before cable springs the trap on
VOD? You have to know they must be planning to hook as many people as they
can for a period of time and then will most likely charge for it. And if
(when) they do, I bet the rates will clime rapidly! This is cable's history.
Why would they change now?
I lived on a cul-de-sac up until about a month ago. There were 13 houses on
that street and all started with cable. There was only one that was still on
Comcast when I left. When you looked at the surrounding neighborhoods,
dishes were popping up every where. I actually changed because I kept
hearing from my neighbors how much better the DBS was then the cable and I
was becoming more and more frustrated with cables problems and poor service.
The one exception is that I do miss the higher speed internet, but my DSL is
half the price or less and it works fine... and I use it a lot... which is
why I was so pissed off at Comcast when they went down so often, and for a
period of over a day on several occasions.
Then there is TiVo.. that indeed has me hooked. I find I don't sit in front
of the TV and channel surf any where near as much as before. I do the time
shift like everyone else.. and although it does cost $4.99 a month.. it's
worth it! I love my TiVo!
Craig
"Sean" <none> wrote in message
news:h8gn71hakejl2mf65rbo16obes19478dfn@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 06 May 2005 18:39:52 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com>
> wrote:
>
>>In article <Xns964E7922E5136Louiscypherhellorg@140.99.99.130>,
>> SINNER <arcade.master@googlemail.net> wrote:
>>
>>> * Sean Wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
>>>
>>> > Please let us
>>> > all know where we can record that 11 minute show on "Heavy Weather
>>> > Sailing" on our DVR's.
>>>
>>>
>>> I bet that one gets viewed 2x a week. If you have to watch a 11 minute
>>> instructional video on how to sail in Heavy Weather I am sure the Coast
>>> Guard would rather you kept your fat ass on the couch.
>>>
>>> And I am sure that Golf instructional has you becoming a regualr Jack
>>> Nicholas in 9 minutes. Just becasue it has something that Tivo/Sat
>>> doesnt, dosent make it better or even useful which is why they turned
>>> to Tivo, so they would program what the consumer wants instead of
>>> usless garbage. My friend was bragging all about VOD....until he got a
>>> DVR.
>>>
>>> --
>>> David
>>
>>50 million viewers of Satellite cant be wrong.
>
> I guess that means 154 million (as of 2003) viewers of cable are
> wrong.
>
> Rather than take a Tivo/Sat rumpswab dolt like Jackies word for this,
> let's look at some official data from
>
> http
/uspirg.org/uspirg.asp?id2=10531&id3=USPIRG&
>
>
> Although cable operators argue that they face serious competition from
> the nation's two Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) providers, data
> compiled by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) also confirm
> that DBS, while growing in subscribers, appeals primarily to limited
> subsets of consumers, and is unable to restrain cable's prices charged
> to consumers at large.
>
> ...
>
> This failure of DBS to restrain cable prices also reflects the fact
> that DBS is popular primarily at two edges of the market - in rural
> areas where there is no cable service at all, and among the minority
> of consumers that are willing to pay stiff premiums to receive large
> numbers of sports channels. DBS also has serious shortcomings that
> limit its appeal to many cable subscribers. DBS cannot reach many
> urban customers who lack a direct line of sight to the southern sky,
> and dishes are often difficult to install in the multifamily dwelling
> units that house approximately 30 percent of the U.S. population. DBS
> is still not able to offer local broadcast channels in many markets.
> Surveys indicate that 47 percent of cable subscribers would not
> subscribe to satellite service for that reason alone. DBS is also
> unable to offer customers the same bundles as cable operators,
> including telephone services, and has been extremely slow in offering
> efficient two-way high-speed Internet access services. Making matters
> worse, as the major cable operators have completed their nationwide
> upgrades to digital facilities, DBS loses the quality advantage it
> previously could offer to lure high-end subscribers.
>
>
> Lots more good real data instead of gibberish from Jackie the moron.
>
> Sean
/www.nabs.net/Cartoons/FoxTrot/Blackboard.gif
/www.nabs.net/Cartoons/OverTheHedge/TreeChainsaw.gif
Facebook
Twitter