| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Deuteros" |
| Date: |
28 Feb 2006 08:41:33 PM |
| Object: |
Re: bad news |
wrote in
news:WPydnQ-iw9mBIZ7ZnZ2dnUVZ_tGdnZ2d@comcast.com:
Chris Basken <-> wrote:
Why should I be interested in supporting a channel I never watch?
Two reasons ...
1) You can be fully assured that the only affect this will practically
have is that you'll pay just as much money for less channels, or
a bit less money for a lot less channels. IE the cable companies
are going to manage to profit *them* and not you
2) Because a lot of new channels which might even turn out to be pretty
good/popular only ever get picked up because they're being subsidized
by other channels in terms of the cable companies $$$. IE
hypothetically some channel in the future that you would have really
liked would simply never exist because there isn't the money to get
it off the ground.
I realize they're both fairly indirect, and I did originally support the
a la carte idea but now i have to say i like the current system. If
I trusted the companies to be looking out for *us* I might think
differently.
It's not a company's job to be "looking out for us". A company's job is to
make money for the shareholders.
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: bad news |
01 Mar 2006 10:08:40 AM |
|
|
In alt.battlestar-galactica Deuteros <deuteros@xrs.net> wrote:
It's not a company's job to be "looking out for us". A company's job is to
make money for the shareholders.
Who said otherwise? My issue is that many people support this "a la carte"
pricing scheme on the mistaken notion that it will somehow help the
consumers - that the companies are saying "Here, we've been screwing you
in the ***** for years, and now we're going to stop". That's simply
not true - they wouldn't be interested in doing this if it was not a move
to make them more money. As such, these people who think their bills
are going to magically go down should take notice that the cable companies
*want* this scheme because it definitely means higher profit margins
for the companies.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
