how could the whole deal be improved for everyone?
2006-09-22 08:28:16 · 10 answers · asked by goodbye and good luck :-) 1 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Television
ok here's my idea...a box that you can have in your home that allows you to add try out or remove channels as you wish so basically total free choice of stations/channels at the touch of a button
2006-09-22 22:51:36 · update #1
Too many channels and to little entertaining content at too high a cost.
As consumers we could demand better content.
2006-09-22 08:34:53 · answer #1 · answered by Dane 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes there are too many channels ( stations if you prefer ) and far too expensive to have them all. In any case, not everyone can afford the full packages offered by cable companies. Personnally, I took the basic because practically all programs are shown on one of the stations anyway. As far as the movies, I still prefer watching them in a cinema. There are cinemas that have specials certain evenings for those who can't afford the full price. I rather have the internet than all those specialized stations on tv.
2006-09-22 08:42:16 · answer #2 · answered by montralia 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes! I have a friend who has 3000 channels and pays like 200 a mo for it. There is no point. If all the cable providers had a base rate for people, it might make things easier, but that will never happen because of the competition.
2006-09-22 08:37:24 · answer #3 · answered by manicschematic 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are two points to make here. "Too many" choices would be relative to how much time a person spends watches TV. So in regards to the amount of content/programming, if people choose to watch it, then its existence is justifiable based on ratings and subsequent advertising revenues.
In regards to costs, yes, programming costs are too high.
Cable providers should be forced to unbundle the various entertainment packages and allow people to specifically choose the programming content/channels that they want to pay for.
To force someone to purchase FOX News, BET, LOGO or Fine Living just beacuase they want ESPN or A&E is not fair.
If these "niche" stations were forced to stand alone based on the cable subscriber's choice to pay the fee and their programming ad revenue it would be more equitable. Let their targeted demographic pay for their exisitence and do not force me to buy it because of "packaging."
2006-09-22 08:49:40 · answer #4 · answered by mcd_48230 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
maybe but in what way could tv channels be at cost to us unless you are talking about freeview or sky tv and then there is too many channels to choose from definitely.
2006-09-22 08:38:19 · answer #5 · answered by blackraspberrypie 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
YES. I have direct tv and there are a mess of channels I do not care about nor watch!
2006-09-22 09:19:35 · answer #6 · answered by tonya j 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We only pay for BBC through the licence fee,[rip off] the rest of the chanels exist by advertising.
2006-09-22 08:37:02 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes sky has only films without adverts yet charge for all their other programs which are full of adverts
2006-09-22 20:47:39 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
what if we all turned off our tellys for a week...
wonder if that would work!
:-)
2006-09-22 08:37:07 · answer #9 · answered by noisy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
we need menu pricing
2006-09-22 08:36:50 · answer #10 · answered by emily f 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋