A la catre tv -- how much would you pay for a network?

[didymus]

I ask because the new Star Trek series will only be available on CBS’s online service which is $5.99/month. The service includes current shows plus archives of old shows.

Supposedly broadcast and bundled cable are on the way out and a la carte will be the new thing. So if the if the big networks will be $6 or more each and smaller networks presumably less how good a deal will it be? My wife and I like different networks (surprise!) and if you factor in kids that’s even more networks. I used to watch TNT, FX and AMC but now only watch one show on TNT anymore. So would people like me watch network X, drop it when there’s nothing they want to see and then re-subscribe when it comes out with new programming?

Last question: most series wind up on Netflix if you’re willing to wait more than a year, will that go out the window?

 

[pensmama87]

I am in no hurry to watch any show.

In our house the issue has always been sports channels. These are what drive the price of cable bundles, and they are the hardest to get by other means (we have looked into it and despite everything, currently the least expensive option for us is…cable. )

I would be willing to just wait for seasons to be released on disc and then borrow them from the library if even Netflix wasn’t available, but if sports channels could be purchased a la carte I think my husband would be willing to pay quite a pretty penny for them.

 

[Usige]

I suspect that you will see many series disappear from Netflix as their contracts expire. You already see that happening with many BBC shows like Doctor Who that were pulled, likely in anticipation of a BBC streaming service. Even at that their series content has often been hit of miss (I waited for the better part of 2 years for seasons 4 and 5 of Warehouse 13 before it was removed from streaming service). The current problem for streaming services is that they are at the mercy of the content providers and hence the reason you see shows disappear after the contracts lapse.

We ditched cable 4 or 5 years back and basically rely on Netflix and Amazon for media content now. We pay an additional 8-10 bucks a month for a premium subscription add on for Amazon. We can add or remove the subscription at anytime. Since we (okay me) tend to binge watch a season over a week or two, I have added the subscription for 2 months and then canceled it for 8-10 months until new content is added.

We don’t watch the “news” or sports so live content is irrelevant to us, but I think those venues are going to have to figure out better ways to provide content. I would be surprised if content distribution looks the same in 5 years as it did even 5 year back. As we shift to a more ala carte model I wonder if the cable companies will be smart enough to simply switch to being distribution hubs and manage subscribers subscriptions (for a small fee). I doubt it, but I don’t know that the era of $150-200+ per month bundled packages is going to continue to fly in the future.

 

[mikekle]

I think network tv will go the same route as the newspaper pretty soon, many people just do not like sitting thru 100+ commercials for junk they do not want when trying to enjoy a program or movie, its very annoying to be constantly interrupted by companies trying to get into my wallet.

Personally, I watch alot of movies on DVD or on youtube, I would have no problem paying a monthly fee if there was no commercial advertising, the plus side is, if enough people find this acceptable, there is no need for commercials at all.

 

[kwitz]

I am in no hurry to watch any show.

In our house the issue has always been sports channels. These are what drive the price of cable bundles, and they are the hardest to get by other means (we have looked into it and despite everything, currently the least expensive option for us is…cable. )

I would be willing to just wait for seasons to be released on disc and then borrow them from the library if even Netflix wasn’t available, but if sports channels could be purchased a la carte I think my husband would be willing to pay quite a pretty penny for them.

We’ve come to the same conclusion. The frustrating part we’ve found is that even if you pay for something like the mlb network, your local team and playoffs are not available. Both of our kids just bought houses and we’ve all been researching options. So many of the streaming services allow you to hook in with more than one email address so we know we could share these but we’re all unwilling to give up our cardinal baseball or blues hockey. We’re looking into sling tv and DS and DDiL are supposed to be giving it the 7 day trial to see how it works.

On Friday, I just went round and round with the cable company to try and save money. It wasn’t until I was talking to the person to cancel my land line that I was offered a better deal. I’m old enough to be attached to that phone number and rather like the idea of having a phone number to give to people I don’t really want to talk to but not so attached to pay for it. It’s $7 cheaper to bundle and keep the phone versus just cable and Internet. DD has the same deal but has no idea what her land line number is - they didn’t even plug a phone into it.

Kris

 

[ProdglArchitect]

The only reason my wife and I still have cable is that she likes having the sports channels. If not for those, I’d probably just have a Hulu and Netflix account and watch everything on those.

 

[Joe_5859]

I think CBS overpriced their channel. I think $2 per channel would be more reasonable. $6 a month is only slightly cheaper than Netflix or Amazon Prime.

Lucky for me, I’m not into watching sports. The cable company definitely realizes that people are willing to pay for those, which I think is why the options for getting them are so limited. When it comes to scripted TV shows, people can wait. It’s the “live” broadcasts that are time sensitive. That’s the last trump card the cable company has left. And they aren’t going to let it go easily. If you could buy the sports channels a la carte, that would be the death blow to their business model. The only way I can see them doing that is if they price them so expensively as to basically be about the same as getting a bundle.

 

[TexCatholic4JMJ]

I think CBS overpriced their channel. I think $2 per channel would be more reasonable. $6 a month is only slightly cheaper than Netflix or Amazon Prime.

Lucky for me, I’m not into watching sports. The cable company definitely realizes that people are willing to pay for those, which I think is why the options for getting them are so limited. When it comes to scripted TV shows, people can wait. It’s the “live” broadcasts that are time sensitive. That’s the last trump card the cable company has left. And they aren’t going to let it go easily. If you could buy the sports channels a la carte, that would be the death blow to their business model. The only way I can see them doing that is if they price them so expensively as to basically be about the same as getting a bundle.

I have Dish and my bill is under $30. a month. In the past year I have averaged $5-10
less than that when friends have signed on. I rarely watch live shows, mostly watch
what I have dvr’d. I like the free channels they have every month as well. One has the
ability to add and remove packages as well. But the main reason I love Dish, they have
great service. In the past with other companies, I spent a lot of time getting problems
resolved. That has never been the case up to now. Haven’t had a problem in a while!

 

[didymus]

I think CBS overpriced their channel. I think $2 per channel would be more reasonable. $6 a month is only slightly cheaper than Netflix or Amazon Prime.

Lucky for me, I’m not into watching sports. The cable company definitely realizes that people are willing to pay for those, which I think is why the options for getting them are so limited. When it comes to scripted TV shows, people can wait. It’s the “live” broadcasts that are time sensitive. That’s the last trump card the cable company has left. And they aren’t going to let it go easily. If you could buy the sports channels a la carte, that would be the death blow to their business model. The only way I can see them doing that is if they price them so expensively as to basically be about the same as getting a bundle.

Yeah, $6 is just way too much. I hardly watch TV anymore but the shows I do watch I see on the network’s website with limited commercials.
I think networks already have a better alternative in place, buying seasons or episodes of shows thru Amazon. Or they could add networks to Netflix/Hulu for say $3 each.

Actually I don’t think broadcast is going anywhere anytime soon, bundled cable will probably die first.

 

[Isca]

We pay about £160 a month for our Sky TV package (includes landline telephone and internet).

We get sports (including British football, which isn’t screened live in this country), movies and documentaries included in that, along with all the other channels.

It’s expensive, but we love football and watch a lot of TV.

 

[Potter]

Zero. Haven watched TV since 2008. Seasons of shows on DVD are crazy cheap.

 

[Maxirad]

I suspect that you will see many series disappear from Netflix as their contracts expire.

To my knowledge, no Quinn Martin shows have been streamed via Netflix.

 

[Usige]

To my knowledge, no Quinn Martin shows have been streamed via Netflix.

I had to go look who he was up. There are likely thousands of shows that never have (or will) be streamed. I wonder who the copyright holders are. If they are not open to streaming, you and I will be dead before the copyrights expire and they pass into the public domain.

The worst thing to me is there are hundreds of niche shows that are streamed, but I think few people would watch. I suspect they are low budget or never could get a syndication contract, so they likely had very low cost for rebroadcast rights and I’m guessing were in a bundle (i.e. 50 grade B shows for a couple hundred bucks a year). I ant think that someone at netflix or Hulu said, hey we really need this poofly written and produced show. Many feel like filler.

 

[Joe_5859]

Yeah, $6 is just way too much. I hardly watch TV anymore but the shows I do watch I see on the network’s website with limited commercials.
I think networks already have a better alternative in place, buying seasons or episodes of shows thru Amazon. Or they could add networks to Netflix/Hulu for say $3 each.

Actually I don’t think broadcast is going anywhere anytime soon, bundled cable will probably die first.

The problem with paying for cable is that I then would feel obligated to watch a bunch to get my money’s worth.

Doing the math is what keeps me from buying in. If I were to pay, say $60 a month for cable, that comes out to $2 a day, every day. If I only watch one show per night and don’t watch TV every night, I’m better off buying episodes on Amazon Instant Video for $2 each. Then I would at least be more discriminating about what I choose to spend money watching.

 

[JimG]

Antennas are cheap.

 

[FghtinIrshNvrDi]

I tossed an antenna on the roof, got rid of the “cable” package with Time Warner, kept the internet connectivity, and got the bill from $100 down to $35/mo.

Sling was cheap, $20 a month. That was our KC Royals baseball fix. All in we’re at $55 for media content. I’m tempted to cut the Sling as well, who needs to sit around and watch TV?

 

[Usige]

Antennas are cheap.

Works as long as you are in the broadcast area and the terrain cooperates. We unfortunately sit in a valley with a 200 foot mesa between us and the towers. That puts us in a radio wave shadow for the major networks. Last time I checked we get one local independant station. Not a huge loss to me since most TV is garbage anyway.

 

[Joe_5859]

Works as long as you are in the broadcast area and the terrain cooperates. We unfortunately sit in a valley with a 200 foot mesa between us and the towers. That puts us in a radio wave shadow for the major networks. Last time I checked we get one local independant station. Not a huge loss to me since most TV is garbage anyway.

Right. That’s about where I was at, too. I went out and bought a nice digital antenna. We got one channel. Kind of. Then I took it back.

I’ll have to try it again now that I have moved to flatter terrain.

 

[JimG]

Works as long as you are in the broadcast area and the terrain cooperates. We unfortunately sit in a valley with a 200 foot mesa between us and the towers. That puts us in a radio wave shadow for the major networks. Last time I checked we get one local independant station. Not a huge loss to me since most TV is garbage anyway.

It is dependent on terrain. My brother in the KC area uses an attic antenna to feed a Tivo DVR for which he pays nothing. (His daughter and son in law bought the Tivo which has no content (and no monthly fee). He feeds in the antenna (name removed by moderator)ut, internet (name removed by moderator)ut, DVD player (name removed by moderator)ut. The Tivo allows him to schedule whatever programming he wants to record off air for the next day or week, and it’s great at skipping through commercials. He pays nothing to any cable company.

 

[mikekle]

It is dependent on terrain. My brother in the KC area uses an attic antenna to feed a Tivo DVR for which he pays nothing. (His daughter and son in law bought the Tivo which has no content (and no monthly fee). He feeds in the antenna (name removed by moderator)ut, internet (name removed by moderator)ut, DVD player (name removed by moderator)ut. The Tivo allows him to schedule whatever programming he wants to record off air for the next day or week, and it’s great at skipping through commercials. He pays nothing to any cable company.

Wouldnt that still use alot of internet data though, especially if they are watching movies?

Is this set up anything like those ‘rabbit jacks’, those cheap USB looking things sold for $19.99 promising free unlimited tv?