Follow us on...
Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Facebook
Register
Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1

    The CRTC Launches Letís Talk TV: Choicebook

    The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) today invited Canadians to provide their input on the difficult choices to be made regarding the television system by filling out the Letís Talk TV Choicebook.

    More...

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto area
    Posts
    1,048
    It's kind of interesting and is presented in a relatively fair manner I think, pointing out the most common complaints of people but suggesting some of the changes could result in consequences some may have not considered and that not everyone agrees and wants the same thing. In the part about "pick and pay", "pick a pack", and the current system of large packages of channels, I think they failed to mention one of the obvious problems encouraged by the present system -- that a great number of channels are kept artificially alive with extremely little worthwhile original programming that is spread very thinly over these large number of channels.
    And, sorry grandma, but I can't remember the last time I watched a local TV newscast, unless you count switching to CP24 once in while.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,077
    Quote Originally Posted by Donovan's Monkey View Post
    It's kind of interesting and is presented in a relatively fair manner I think, pointing out the most common complaints of people but suggesting some of the changes could result in consequences some may have not considered and that not everyone agrees and wants the same thing. In the part about "pick and pay", "pick a pack", and the current system of large packages of channels, I think they failed to mention one of the obvious problems encouraged by the present system -- that a great number of channels are kept artificially alive with extremely little worthwhile original programming that is spread very thinly over these large number of channels.
    And, sorry grandma, but I can't remember the last time I watched a local TV newscast, unless you count switching to CP24 once in while.
    I dont think i would say a grat number of channels there ar some sure but many do and would do ok under pick and pay.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto area
    Posts
    1,048
    I wonder how the "pick and pay" (or "pick a pack") system would be put into place? Could the CRTC just mandate that all existing contracts that require a channel to have a minimum percentage of subscribers would immediately become invalid, or become invalid after a certain period of time like a few months or a year? It also mentioned something that had not occurred to me -- that the American specialty channels could refuse to play along. Presumably all the Canadian channels would have to go along with the new system even if they don't like it because they would have no other realistic choice. But maybe the American specialty channels -- A&E, TLC, etc. -- could afford to just refuse to sign any new carriage deal that did not guarantee a minimum percentage of subscribers, perhaps afraid that giving in to it in Canada would encourage similar arrangements in the U.S.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,077
    Does anyone think we could lose Fox/Abc/Nbc/Cbs?
    Last edited by ottawasnowdog; 03-24-2014 at 06:34 AM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,977
    It also mentioned something that had not occurred to me -- that the American specialty channels could refuse to play along.
    Several US specialty channels are already available a la carte on Shaw Direct & EastLink including American Heroes Channel, BET, Bloomberg TV, GSN, MSNBC and NFL Network. This indicates that some channels are open to having their service sold on an a la carte basis. I think the more popular specialty channels will put up a fight but if pick and pay is mandated by the government and all providers are forced to offer it then the US broadcaster will have to rethink their position or possibly risk losing some subscribers.

    My view on this whole issue is that pick and pay should be offered alongside the existing packages (as an alternative) and should not become a replacement for the current packaging system. The one constant in all this debate is Choice, people want the freedom to subscribe and pay for the services they want instead of being forced to pay for the channels and/or packages that BDU's force on them. Therefore, the logical thing to do IMO is to give people the choice they want- offer both packages and a la carte and let subscribers decide which option they want to go with. Those that like having many channels to select from will stay with packages and those that have more refined tastes and are only interested in a select few (I would say on average most people watch only a handful of channels regularly) will go with the pick and pay option.

    Does anyone think we could lose Fox/Abc/Nbc/Cbs?
    I don't think they will remove these channels as they have been available in Canada since Cable TV service began several decades ago. What they might do is remove the US networks from the basic package and put them together in a separate package and charge extra for them. The only way you might lose them is if the local stations decide to get into a carriage dispute with BDU's, that might result in some stations being dropped if they are asking for too much $$.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,773
    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    My view on this whole issue is that pick and pay should be offered alongside the existing packages (as an alternative) and should not become a replacement for the current packaging system. The one constant in all this debate is Choice, people want the freedom to subscribe and pay for the services they want instead of being forced to pay for the channels and/or packages that BDU's force on them. Therefore, the logical thing to do IMO is to give people the choice they want- offer both packages and a la carte and let subscribers decide which option they want to go with. Those that like having many channels to select from will stay with packages and those that have more refined tastes and are only interested in a select few (I would say on average most people watch only a handful of channels regularly) will go with the pick and pay option.
    In Quebec, where I'm located, Bell TV (both Fibe and Satellite) and Videotron are already doing this. As for Shaw Direct, they offer a limited number of channels with the a la carte option to go with the packages. But overall, I think it is a wonderful idea to keep both theme packs and the a la carte option - everybody has a choice, all corresponding to their preferences.
    Last edited by lostjon; 03-24-2014 at 12:43 PM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto area
    Posts
    1,048
    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    Several US specialty channels are already available a la carte ... I think the more popular specialty channels will put up a fight but if pick and pay is mandated by the government and all providers are forced to offer it then the US broadcaster will have to rethink their position or possibly risk losing some subscribers...
    On another forum someone is claiming this is the situation with Speed Channel on Bell and Rogers -- supposedly with Fox wanting the same deal they've had, but Bell and Rogers wanting to remove it from the larger packages resulting in fewer subscribers and therefore less money even if it was at the same rate charged per month per subscriber. I don't know for sure if that's the case, but it does seem like a reasonable explanation for the vague suggestion in the Rogers statement about being willing to still carry it for a reasonable rate to a more specialized audience. It would seem Fox has chosen to lose Canadian subscribers, although I'm guessing they may have little interest in indefinitely continuing the channel in its present form. And it also does not explain the failure of the Canadian carriers to look into another non-Canadian motorsports channel to replace the Speed Channel from the US when they had a year to do so -- unless the other possibilities also all refused to be made available unless in a large package of channels. And if the more widely available packages are only going to be only for the general sports channels and not the niche ones, you'd expect them to soon give the same treatment to The Golf Channel.
    Last edited by Donovan's Monkey; 03-28-2014 at 03:45 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    4,767
    Quote Originally Posted by Donovan's Monkey View Post
    On another forum someone is claiming this is the situation with Speed Channel on Bell and Rogers -- supposedly with Fox wanting the same deal they've had, but Bell and Rogers wanting to remove it from the larger packages resulting in fewer subscribers and therefore less money even if it was at the same rate charged per month per subscriber. (...) And if the more widely available packages are only going to be only for the general sports channels and not the niche ones, you'd expect them to soon give the same treatment to The Golf Channel.
    Big difference : Speed became Fox Sports 1 in the US, which airs general sports games and shows. But they kept the Speed brand for Canada, airing filler shows in loop but can't air commercials targetting canadians, but flipping the switch whenever FS1/FS2 airs a motor sport whose canadian broadcast rights hasn't been sold to TSN or Sportsnet. It's just like FX Canada, its sole existence is based on its original programming, rest of the time, go away, it's dull and repetitive !

    Think a bar owner used to tume to Speed anytime of the day and get some motorsport content. This is no longer the case. Golf Channel is still the case. Golf has value, Speed no longer does. So it makes sense to either put it in a specialty package instead of a popular one or on basic. If Fox still want big money for little content, then goodbye Speed: TSN and Sportsnet can buy those original programs anyways.
    "It's not a rerun if you haven't watched it yet." (© 2010 by TVViewer)
    "Ne jamais s'obstiner avec un ťpais. Il va vous abaisser ŗ son niveau et vous battre avec l'expťrience."

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto area
    Posts
    1,048
    Quote Originally Posted by InMontreal View Post
    ... TSN and Sportsnet can buy those original programs anyways.
    That's like saying TSN and Sportsnet can buy any of the original programming on The Golf Channel. I suppose they could if they wanted to, but they won't. Nothing that was on Speed in the last year has been picked up by TSN or Sportsnet. It's part of the idiotic lies Rogers and Bell have been annoying racing fans with in their explanations for getting rid of Speed and not replacing it with another motorsports channel, as they should have done with a year of warning to do so. Rogers has all those Sportsnet channels and presumably have some room to carry more racing, but still carry only the IndyCar series that they started showing last year.

    Saying something like "all the motorsports that should matter to anyone is already on our channels" as they are now saying is simply not true and just p.o.'ing the racing viewers even more, in the same way saying something similar about golf would anger Golf Channel viewers (or NFL Network, MLB Network, Leafs TV, NBA TV Canada, Fight Network, etc.) if they were to get rid of it simply because of a fee dispute and not replace it when there are better channels of the same genre available.
    Last edited by Donovan's Monkey; 03-30-2014 at 08:48 PM.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •