Follow us on...
Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Facebook
Register
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 58
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Burnaby, B.C.
    Posts
    87

    Conservative view on cable

    For any one who remembers Mr. Harper's first election campaign, he statedd that to increase competition in Canada he would open the Canadian market to American DTH providers. He also wants to change to CRTC to a licence issuing organization with no power to punish companies that do not comply with their licence terms. He stated that he felt that if the American satellite companies were allowed access to our market, then BellATV & Starchoice would be given access to the American market. Hopefully this is kept in mind by both parties in this fight. They might just find that Harper allows DirectTV & Dish into yhe market to keep competition going. Global & CTV would find their total numbers plummeting as they are not carried by these providers.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,918
    Actually, regulated is consumer friendly, as the skinny basic price would be regulated by the CRTC. It would be a low cost, rate regulated basic for low income families.
    How is it consumer friendly when you would still be FORCED to subscribe to it whether you wanted it or not?! Its fine for those that want it but what about those who don't?? Most people in this day and age want freedom and choice, 2 things the Canadian broadcasting system does not currently offer consumers and if the broadcasters & BDU's had their way, never would! Why do they insist on forcing things on people, if the channels in the basic package are worth watching then people will subscribe to them, regulation may be good in some instances but not here. LET THE CHANNELS STAND ON THEIR OWN, THE STRONG WILL SURVIVE, THE WEAK WILL SHUT DOWN.

    For any one who remembers Mr. Harper's first election campaign, he statedd that to increase competition in Canada he would open the Canadian market to American DTH providers. He also wants to change to CRTC to a licence issuing organization with no power to punish companies that do not comply with their licence terms.
    I strongly doubt that he will actually do this if his party ever gets a majority. You are quoting something he said years ago and more importantly politicians make many promises when trying to get elected but don't usually deliver when in power. Good move on reversing the decision for Globalive in favour of increased competition, how about something similar for broadcasting?! We need some competition in the television industry as well, that is the only thing that will bring about something favourable for the consumer.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    12,204
    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    How is it consumer friendly when you would still be FORCED to subscribe to it whether you wanted it or not?! Its fine for those that want it but what about those who don't?? Most people in this day and age want freedom and choice, 2 things the Canadian broadcasting system does not currently offer consumers and if the broadcasters & BDU's had their way, never would! Why do they insist on forcing things on people, if the channels in the basic package are worth watching then people will subscribe to them, regulation may be good in some instances but not here. LET THE CHANNELS STAND ON THEIR OWN, THE STRONG WILL SURVIVE, THE WEAK WILL SHUT DOWN.

    I strongly doubt that he will actually do this if his party ever gets a majority. You are quoting something he said years ago and more importantly politicians make many promises when trying to get elected but don't usually deliver when in power. Good move on reversing the decision for Globalive in favour of increased competition, how about something similar for broadcasting?! We need some competition in the television industry as well, that is the only thing that will bring about something favourable for the consumer.
    Well as other posters here have mentioned, when you pay for basic cable you don't JUST pay for channels, you also pay for other services, so you would somehow need to pay for that, so under your idea you would be buying a package with zero channels, and the BDU's would likely want to profit from that package so the price would be higher. So you would be paying for a package with NO CHANNELS. It makes more sense for the BDU's to include TV channels in their basic package, that way subscribers don't feel like they are paying for nothing.

    I don't think many people would be happy with paying a fee just to subscribe to cable, and then paying more just to get channels.

    I don't know any country in the world that does this, in the U.S. cable sells channels via packages as well. You say you are against regulation, well the CRTC forcing BDU's to change the way they sell all their channels and their basic package sounds like alot of regulation to me.
    My views are my own and do not represent any company.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    Sure you would, CBC would still exist and community stations offered by cable companies would still be there too. I think things would be better if CTV & Global no longer existed, the community stations would fill the void by providing better and more relevant local content than CTV & Global ever will. They already air more local programming then the conglomerates do on their networks. The CRTC actually held a hearing about Community TV recently, they are looking at allowing these channels to be made available OTA, which I think is an excellent idea! The only network worth saving (like it or hate it) is CBC because its the only network that is TRULY CANADIAN!
    Your cable company would very likely kill your community channels if a) it wasn't mandatory for a cable companies to carry one, b) wasn't subsided by cable customers.

    So no, the community channels would die if the BDUs weren't forced to.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta!!
    Posts
    317
    I believe in an all or nothing approach. If local news programming goes off the air so should community stations. Want local news or weather? Too bad. Buys thermometer and figure it out yourself.

    We don't need no weather updates anyways. Sports? Only losers watch that crap. I've lived off the grid for years now so property taxes don't affect me.

    Crap how do I edit that last part out...

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,918
    Well as other posters here have mentioned, when you pay for basic cable you don't JUST pay for channels, you also pay for other services, so you would somehow need to pay for that, so under your idea you would be buying a package with zero channels, and the BDU's would likely want to profit from that package so the price would be higher. So you would be paying for a package with NO CHANNELS.
    HUH?!

    That makes completely no sense whatsoever?! How could I buy a package without any channels, care to explain that one a little more?! The basic package was created by the CRTC, it exists solely because they mandate that BDU's must carry it and subscribers must subscribe to it. What I (and many others) want is the OPTION of not having to subscribe to it, very simple logic here nothing too difficult to comprehend. Basic cable can still exist but I shouldn't be forced to subscribe to it just because the idiots at the CRTC say I have to. As long as this requirement exists, I will never subscribe to cable or satellite, online viewing suits me just fine. Get rid of must-subscribe basic and then I might consider signing up, if there is anything worth subscribing to.

    I don't think many people would be happy with paying a fee just to subscribe to cable, and then paying more just to get channels.
    Why would you have to pay a fee just to subscribe to cable, where are you getting this stuff from?! Do you have to pay a fee in order to have phone service or Internet- no you pay for whatever package you have signed up for, there are no pre-requisites with those services or any other except for television. Only in the television industry do they say if you want to sign up for our service you must subscribe to basic or you can't sign up at all- what kind of whack job thinking is that?? You don't want my business- fine no problem I don't need cable or satellite that badly.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    4,748
    Quote Originally Posted by TVViewer View Post
    Retransmitters are NOT broadcasting 14/7 hours a week of local programming in the market. CHCH is not broadcasting Toronto programming. It's only stations that offer 14/7 hours a week of local programming in the market.
    OK, so CKVR (/A\ Barrie) is allowed to simsub in the GTA on BDUs, but only residents of Barrie will pay for that channel ? That gotta suck.
    CHCH Hamilton can be seen in the GTA, but only Hamilton residents will pay for it. Their news can also cover Toronto...

    And something important you forgot in the "Big Picture"... If Canadian broadcasters are granted permission to negociate value for signal, US networks will ask a fee to be carried by canadian BDUs as well ! So add 4 networks + nearby CW+MyNet + possibly PBS... that's 3.50$ more here.
    "It's not a rerun if you haven't watched it yet." (© 2010 by TVViewer)
    "Ne jamais s'obstiner avec un épais. Il va vous abaisser à son niveau et vous battre avec l'expérience."

  8. #28
    And something important you forgot in the "Big Picture"... If Canadian broadcasters are granted permission to negociate value for signal, US networks will ask a fee to be carried by canadian BDUs as well ! So add 4 networks + nearby CW+MyNet + possibly PBS... that's 3.50$ more here.
    Why the hell would American OTA networks ask for carriage fees? They don't need them, they're doing fine as they are with their own fees from the American BDUs.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    12,204
    Quote Originally Posted by CDN Viewer View Post
    HUH?!

    That makes completely no sense whatsoever?! How could I buy a package without any channels, care to explain that one a little more?! The basic package was created by the CRTC, it exists solely because they mandate that BDU's must carry it and subscribers must subscribe to it. What I (and many others) want is the OPTION of not having to subscribe to it, very simple logic here nothing too difficult to comprehend. Basic cable can still exist but I shouldn't be forced to subscribe to it just because the idiots at the CRTC say I have to. As long as this requirement exists, I will never subscribe to cable or satellite, online viewing suits me just fine. Get rid of must-subscribe basic and then I might consider signing up, if there is anything worth subscribing to.

    Why would you have to pay a fee just to subscribe to cable, where are you getting this stuff from?! Do you have to pay a fee in order to have phone service or Internet- no you pay for whatever package you have signed up for, there are no pre-requisites with those services or any other except for television. Only in the television industry do they say if you want to sign up for our service you must subscribe to basic or you can't sign up at all- what kind of whack job thinking is that?? You don't want my business- fine no problem I don't need cable or satellite that badly.
    Other posters here have said that not all the money from your basic cable package goes towards the TV channels in it, cable keeps about 70% of the profits from basic cable and uses them to fund their services, your not just simply paying for the channels in your basic cable package, your paying for all the other stuff cable/satellite does, so cable needs you to buy the basic package. Making the basic package optional means people wont have to pay the subscriber fees, but you would still need to pay for everything else.

    Maybe the other posters are wrong and 70% of the money you pay for basic cable goes directly to BDU shareholders, but others have said on this forum that it goes to support other services, so if your not buying the basic package, your not paying for the services.
    My views are my own and do not represent any company.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    12,204
    Quote Originally Posted by Emarsee View Post
    Why the hell would American OTA networks ask for carriage fees? They don't need them, they're doing fine as they are with their own fees from the American BDUs.
    Exactly!

    The U.S. local stations are not stupid, they know that their local news doesn't provide value to Canadians, and they know that most of their other programming is simsubed by the Canadian networks. If one was stupid enough to ask for any fee, the BDU could just simply pick up another U.S. station from another market. The U.S. networks are not stupid.
    My views are my own and do not represent any company.

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by TVViewer View Post
    Exactly!

    The U.S. local stations are not stupid, they know that their local news doesn't provide value to Canadians, and they know that most of their other programming is simsubed by the Canadian networks. If one was stupid enough to ask for any fee, the BDU could just simply pick up another U.S. station from another market. The U.S. networks are not stupid.
    Plus picking up another US stations is a lot easier than picking up another US specialty. If WKBW decided they wanted carriage fees from Rogers, Rogers would give them the finger and pick up WXYZ, WHAM, WJET or any other ABC station if they wanted. They don't have to stick with WKBW unlike the Canadian channels where they have the carry the stations in that market.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    64
    I could have swore the title of this thread was "Will Conservatives block FFC?" , not a rehash of the other treads!

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,140
    Quote Originally Posted by TVViewer View Post
    You need to re-read my post, not only did the CRTC say TVO wouldn't count, but they only said broadcasters producing 14/7 hours a week in the local market.
    OK, I'll give you that, I didn't see that part of the post as I mostly skim through the posts related to this stuff as it's just the same boring stuff rehashed over and over again.

    So assuming what you even said is true, which as I said before, you're like Fox News and it's hard to trust to those guys; it's best to actually look up info yourself and I would but I'm so over this nauseating subject so I'm not going to bother, but nevertheless I'm rambling on here, my point is, you said in Toronto cable would only go up $1 - $2, when you did it yourself, it came out to be $3.50 in Toronto. Granted, it's not a huge amount more, but still, it's more nonetheless.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    4,748
    Quote Originally Posted by Emarsee View Post
    Why the hell would American OTA networks ask for carriage fees? They don't need them, they're doing fine as they are with their own fees from the American BDUs.
    Seattle US stations are carried by virtually all cable and satellite providers, AND they sell ads to western canadian advertisers. Why woud they be satisfied with only their Seattle market?

    For Vermont stations, they are distributed on all of Videotron's territory, which is the majority of the Quebec province. Montreal market is ten times bigger than the Burlington-Plattsburgh market.

    I can bet Buffalo stations would LOVE to obtain 1 million $ more each in revenues per month from Rogers customers, which covers the majority of Ontario.

    Easy money for them.
    "It's not a rerun if you haven't watched it yet." (© 2010 by TVViewer)
    "Ne jamais s'obstiner avec un épais. Il va vous abaisser à son niveau et vous battre avec l'expérience."

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,140
    Quote Originally Posted by Emarsee View Post
    Why the hell would American OTA networks ask for carriage fees? They don't need them, they're doing fine as they are with their own fees from the American BDUs.
    I guess the same reason why the American and other foreign cable channels want in Canada and carriage fees. TLC is doing quite fine in the US and they certainly don't need Canadian fees to survive, yet they still want the fees.

  16. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by musimax View Post
    I guess the same reason why the American and other foreign cable channels want in Canada and carriage fees. TLC is doing quite fine in the US and they certainly don't need Canadian fees to survive, yet they still want the fees.
    I think I've mentioned this before as one of the reasons why the American stations may not want carriage fees.

    Plus picking up another US stations is a lot easier than picking up another US specialty. If WKBW decided they wanted carriage fees from Rogers, Rogers would give them the finger and pick up WXYZ, WHAM, WJET or any other ABC station if they wanted. They don't have to stick with WKBW unlike the Canadian channels where they have the carry the stations in that market.
    There isn't a lot the Canadian BDUs could do if they didn't want to pay for TLC because there isn't an alternative source for that programming. There are hundreds of the Big 4 affiliates in America, there's only one TLC.

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by InMontreal View Post
    Seattle US stations are carried by virtually all cable and satellite providers, AND they sell ads to western canadian advertisers. Why woud they be satisfied with only their Seattle market?
    Perhaps I'm not paying enough attention, but I never saw a Canadian ad on the Big 4 Seattle stations.

    Once again, the only American stations that seem to care about Canadians with their programming and advertising are the border PBS stations and KVOS.

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,140
    Quote Originally Posted by Emarsee View Post
    I think I've mentioned this before as one of the reasons why the American stations may not want carriage fees.
    Why would that make American stations not want carriage fees though? I don't get it.

  19. #39
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    1,044
    Quote Originally Posted by Emarsee View Post
    Perhaps I'm not paying enough attention, but I never saw a Canadian ad on the Big 4 Seattle stations.

    Once again, the only American stations that seem to care about Canadians with their programming and advertising are the border PBS stations and KVOS.
    I've seen a few ads on the Seattle networks for say The Brick, but not a lot. The Spokane stations however do have a lot of Canadian ads on them since they are cheaper to buy there and reach larger Canadian markets than their own market.

  20. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by musimax View Post
    Why would that make American stations not want carriage fees though? I don't get it.
    The Canadian BDUs can just choose another source of network programming. I've already mentioned the WKBW example.

    They would just be shooting themselves in the foot and end up with no extra money and no Canadian cable carriage.

 

 

Posting Permissions

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