I want to cut the cable.....but what about sports?? - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 77 Old 01-10-2014, 01:52 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
NetworkTV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 15,586
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 153 Post(s)
Liked: 432
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aliens View Post

I know this could only take place in a universe far, far away, but it would be great if you could have a satellite/cable system similar to Netflix, Amazon, etc., etc., where you would have all of the available channels (create your favorite list as well) at your disposal, then select the channel/channels you want, the duration, and only pay for that. Go away on vacation and you wouldn't incur any expense. Like I said: far, far away. biggrin.gif
I'm not sure this would end up being cheaper.

Essentially, what you want is PPV, and that is always more expensive than a flat monthly fee unless you watch almost nothing. If you really watch almost nothing, then there's little reason to subscribe at all since there's little you'd be giving up.
Quote:
Like others, my main reason for having satellite is to have access to all of the sporting events I like. The old standbys like Discovery, Nat Geo, TLC, and a few others, have fallen into a cesspool and can’t get out. I have 23 channels in my regular favorite list (not counting OTA) and there are only 10 that I have any real interest in, and too often many of those have nothing of interest to me. I have 9 channels in my sports favorite list. My D* bill is reduced because I switched to them last year, so my 19 channels of interest currently cost me $2.95 per channel, every month. For me to have access to 200+ channels and only have 19 of interest is not a good deal. Fortunately for me, it’s a deal I can afford to make. Life without access to satellite sports would leave a great void. Can’t do it. No way.
The assumption is that picking and choosing channels would be significantly cheaper.

The problem is, if you really broke down what channels you don't watch, you'd likely find the prices for the bulk of those channels are literally pennies on the dollar - some as little as 2, 3 or 5 cents per sub.

Of course, there are channels that get multiple dollars a month, but most of the cost to the providers is paid for within the lowest of service levels. What the rest of the customers pay for is the cost of the boxes, the program centers, staffing, installs, repairs and all the other things . Heck, the taxes and other state and federal fees are likely more of your bill than ESPN is.

So, sure, you could eliminate a ton of channels you personally don't watch, but I'd bet they'd all add up to no more than $10 or so a month. It's likely that most people want the very channels that cost the most, which is often the likely reason they cost the most.

Granted, saving that $10 or so might sound nice, but it's likely the cable company would make that back (and more) with some sort of fee to have the ability to pay for fewer channels. That doesn't even take into account the channels you do want that would likely cost you more in order to get that ala carte service.

People like my parents that really only have cable because reception OTA is sketchy where they live as well as for 2 or 3 cable channels would likely save a bunch of money, but I think most other people greatly overestimate how much savings they would see.

For example, for the 19 channels you want, it's unlikely you would pay less. That $2.95 a channel isn't for the channels. There are many other costs that wouldn't simply go away when those other 180 channels disappear.

I'd be willing to be that the savings to channel count would be somewhere below 10 channels to save enough to be worth losing the few channels that you aren't currently watching, but might if a show crops up on it down the road that you would watch.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
NetworkTV is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 77 Old 01-10-2014, 03:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Jedi Master's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Macon, GA
Posts: 1,627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
The old standbys like Discovery, Nat Geo, TLC, and a few others, have fallen into a cesspool and can’t get out

Also TV Land, Scifi, Disney, AMC, and Bravo are some of the others in the cesspool. What these channels have deteriorated to is a darn shame.

Broadcast TV - a vital national public resource
Jedi Master is offline  
post #33 of 77 Old 01-10-2014, 05:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nayan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Melbourne, FL
Posts: 2,425
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 157
While I happen to enjoy Syfy and AMC, I do agree many of the other channels have gone downhill.

I'm a 'hooker' and a knitter. I guess that makes me bi-stitchual :).
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Nayan is offline  
post #34 of 77 Old 01-10-2014, 07:15 PM
AVS Special Member
 
barrelbelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,696
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Liked: 232
I'm seriously considering cutting the cord. All of cable/sat have become just a reality TV swamp...gossip tv wasteland...propaganda news toilet...raging redneck tv cesspool...and retail dump site. If the Cable service providers don't free us from the tyranny of their awful bundles, they could be doomed within 5 years. And the answer seems so obvious. Just allow us to choose from their bundles...or let us select & compile our own Favorite program lists within comparable and discounted price tiers. What am I missing here?
barrelbelly is offline  
post #35 of 77 Old 01-10-2014, 09:50 PM
Advanced Member
 
crabboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Henderson, Nevada
Posts: 857
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrelbelly View Post

I'm seriously considering cutting the cord. .....What am I missing here?

Reality. As was mentioned before, not in this universe. It's nice to picture a customer uprising, but there's been @#*& on TV forever (vast wasteland, anyone?).
This is a good time for my Nursery Principle: If you stand at a checkout line in the plant department, sooner or later you'll see folks buying bags of cow (flop). If someone will buy it, someone will sell it. And lots of people pay for cable or satellite.
The revolution will not be televised because there will be no revolution.

In space, no one can eat ice cream - Killer Klowns From Outer Space
crabboy is offline  
post #36 of 77 Old 01-11-2014, 02:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Jedi Master's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Macon, GA
Posts: 1,627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aliens View Post

For me to have access to 200+ channels and only have 19 of interest is not a good deal. Fortunately for me, it’s a deal I can afford to make. Life without access to satellite sports would leave a great void. Can’t do it. No way.

That is just what the pay TV companies are wanting to hear. They are reading it with a big smile on their face and an evil look in their eyes.

Broadcast TV - a vital national public resource
Jedi Master is offline  
post #37 of 77 Old 01-11-2014, 08:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Otto Pylot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 7,332
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 166 Post(s)
Liked: 244
+1
Otto Pylot is offline  
post #38 of 77 Old 01-11-2014, 08:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mhufnagel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,040
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by slowbiscuit View Post

Sure, but just saying that cable prices are wildly exaggerated by a few here if you ignore bundle deals.
I dropped Dish and bundled tv with my internet/phone provider and ended up paying $35 per month for tv for a $40 savings. Of course I own my equipment (Tivo's, HTPC w/ WMC, Xbox 360's, cable modem) so I avoid all of those overpriced equipment fees (except for two cable cards). But I get pay-tv channels on four sets now instead of the two I had connected to Dish.

We tried cord-cutting this summer and decided that there was just a lot more high-qualty programming on pay-tv and that we were willing to pay that $35 per month to view it in a more timely manner than depending on it to appear on Netflix and Amazon Prime. Although we still have Netflix and Amazon Prime because we use them for on-demand and we do order a lot of stuff through Amazon.

The myth of "cable prices are $100 per month" pushed by some people gets really tiresome. I've had pay-tv of some sort for over four years now and never payed more than $80 per month for a really nice package from Dish (which is high, but still a lot lower than $100) and are currently paying a whole lot less than that.
slowbiscuit likes this.
mhufnagel is offline  
post #39 of 77 Old 01-11-2014, 09:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mhufnagel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,040
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jedi Master View Post

Also TV Land, Scifi, Disney, AMC, and Bravo are some of the others in the cesspool. What these channels have deteriorated to is a darn shame.

AMC? AMC has some of best programming on television today! FX is another channel with great programming that's better than 90% of what's on any ota network nowadays. While it may not appeal to you, those channels are nowhere near crap.
mhufnagel is offline  
post #40 of 77 Old 01-11-2014, 09:31 AM
AVS Special Member
 
BoilerJim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 6,227
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhufnagel View Post

AMC? AMC has some of best programming on television today! FX is another channel with great programming that's better than 90% of what's on any ota network nowadays. While it may not appeal to you, those channels are nowhere near crap.
AMC has/had some great shows (Mad Men, The Walking Dead, Hell on Wheels, and the now "over" Breaking Bad), but other than those I think it's a shadow of its former self. I personally would like for those shows to be on another channel and for AMC to become the TCM rival it once was (old movies, no commercials).
BoilerJim is offline  
post #41 of 77 Old 01-11-2014, 10:14 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Charles R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 10,051
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 192
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhufnagel View Post

The myth of "cable prices are $100 per month" pushed by some people gets really tiresome.


As does the there isn't any quality programming. Like programming they don't appreciate somehow beats up and kills the never been better quality shows. If attempting to prove a point you have to deceive odds are pretty good you don't have a point. That's why it's repeated endlessly. Although it's not tiresome if one uses the Block list. :) 


| 
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
Charles R is offline  
post #42 of 77 Old 01-11-2014, 12:39 PM
Advanced Member
 
veedon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Raleigh,NC
Posts: 773
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 153 Post(s)
Liked: 47

I guess what it comes down to is that if you want to save money, you just have to make do without much sports on TV.

For me, that's OK because I don't care that much for basketball or football, and I especially loathe the college sports hype that surrounds those two sports.

 

MLB still has a national telecast on FOX on Saturday afternoons, and if you're in a large market, a local station may broadcast a

few games throughout the season, though most ball clubs put most of the games on cable channels now.

One of my local stations airs Durham Bulls minor league baseball games.

 

NBC does some NHL telecasts.

 

Aside from sports, there really still is a lot of good programming on OTA TV, especially if you like PBS.

And there are some decent subchannels.

AnthemAZ.HDTV likes this.
veedon is offline  
post #43 of 77 Old 01-11-2014, 03:42 PM
Senior Member
 
borntocoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 282
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 18
You do not know how many people who I've talked to want to cancel their subscriptions, but can't because Heaven Forbid someone in their family can't do without their daily News or Sports programs.
borntocoast is offline  
post #44 of 77 Old 01-11-2014, 04:16 PM
Advanced Member
 
veedon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Raleigh,NC
Posts: 773
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 153 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntocoast View Post

You do not know how many people who I've talked to want to cancel their subscriptions, but can't because Heaven Forbid someone in their family can't do without their daily News or Sports programs.

 

Sports is the main loss in going OTA-only for TV.

 

For news, the loss is fairly minor.

 

News programs that are still available OTA include the nightly newscasts for three broadcast networks (CBS, NBC, and ABC), the PBS Newshour, BBC News on some public TV stations, the morning news shows from the commercial broadcast networks, 60 Minutes, and, of course, lots of local news broadcasts. Some local stations carry a service called WeatherNation as a weather subchannel.

 

The cable channels CNN and MSNBC usually make clips from their shows available on their web sites after the shows are shown on cable TV.

 

So there's a lot of news available without a cable TV or satellite subscription.

veedon is offline  
post #45 of 77 Old 01-11-2014, 04:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Nayan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Melbourne, FL
Posts: 2,425
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by borntocoast View Post

You do not know how many people who I've talked to want to cancel their subscriptions, but can't because Heaven Forbid someone in their family can't do without their daily News or Sports programs.

It's not that I "can't do", it's "I don't want to" wink.gif. I'm sure there are others who feel the same way I do. If you really don't care about sports or other things, then yes cut the cord but if there's things you like that can't be seen anywhere else, then maybe ditching it isn't for you.
slowbiscuit likes this.

I'm a 'hooker' and a knitter. I guess that makes me bi-stitchual :).
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Nayan is offline  
post #46 of 77 Old 01-11-2014, 07:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mhufnagel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,040
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoilerJim View Post

AMC has/had some great shows (Mad Men, The Walking Dead, Hell on Wheels, and the now "over" Breaking Bad), but other than those I think it's a shadow of its former self. I personally would like for those shows to be on another channel and for AMC to become the TCM rival it once was (old movies, no commercials).

One of the biggest reasons I don't miss the old AMC (or watch TCM that often) is because I can get all of those old movies at my local library. And many are available on one of the major streaming services (Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime).
mhufnagel is offline  
post #47 of 77 Old 01-11-2014, 07:48 PM
Advanced Member
 
crabboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Henderson, Nevada
Posts: 857
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nayan View Post

It's not that I "can't do", it's "I don't want to" wink.gif. I'm sure there are others who feel the same way I do. If you really don't care about sports or other things, then yes cut the cord but if there's things you like that can't be seen anywhere else, then maybe ditching it isn't for you.

I, for the life of me, don't see what the controversy is. It's either worth it to you or it's not.
Let's go back in time and entertain this fantasy: TV comes into existence. Potential viewers have essentially two choices. There's free OTA TV with limited choices, or paid TV (cable, satellite) with more content. Discounts are available for those who want pay TV from their phone/internet company (bundled).
The choice would be simpler. The difference is that (more) sports used to be free. (Not all...I'm old enough to remember NBA finals, tape-delayed on CBS).
The OP wants to cut down on his bills. Choices have to be made. Ya pays your money (or not) and ya takes your choice. Americans (including yours truly) are in major debt partially because we don't budget. This man has his priorities straight.
The real question is how the OP can balance saving money vs. what he wants to see on TV.
slowbiscuit likes this.

In space, no one can eat ice cream - Killer Klowns From Outer Space
crabboy is offline  
post #48 of 77 Old 01-12-2014, 01:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Jedi Master's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Macon, GA
Posts: 1,627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by JtoThaMtoThaP View Post

I live in SLC, Utah.....Utah Jazz games are on cable/sat only and with how bad they suck there will be no national tv games for them lol.....but mainly I watch NBA and the NBA playoffs and usually they are on pay tv until the finals. I also watch NFL and college football, and like I said the BCS game was on ESPN and I would have missed one of the best championship games in history if I didn't have satellite.

One question to ask yourself is why spend a lot of money on a crappy NBA team instead of your baby. Spending money on your baby is more important than helping pay an athlete's 20 million dollar a year salary.

Broadcast TV - a vital national public resource
Jedi Master is offline  
post #49 of 77 Old 01-12-2014, 01:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Jedi Master's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Macon, GA
Posts: 1,627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhufnagel View Post

AMC? AMC has some of best programming on television today!

AMC used to show movies uncut and commercial free. Now they show the same movies over and over and saturated them with commercials and fill the screen with screen clutter. The best programming isn't zombie horror or drug related crap. CBS is the most watched network. They have shows like Hawaii Five O and Blue Bloods along with a lot of other good shows.

Broadcast TV - a vital national public resource
Jedi Master is offline  
post #50 of 77 Old 01-12-2014, 02:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Jedi Master's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Macon, GA
Posts: 1,627
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhufnagel View Post


The myth of "cable prices are $100 per month" pushed by some people gets really tiresome.

You can get the lifeline cable with the OTA channels for $20 a month. So you are right.

Broadcast TV - a vital national public resource
Jedi Master is offline  
post #51 of 77 Old 01-12-2014, 05:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mhufnagel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,040
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jedi Master View Post

You can get the lifeline cable with the OTA channels for $20 a month. So you are right.

You can get far more than lifeline cable for reasonable prices. I just told you my situation, yet you choose not to bring it up. I guess people are right about you.
mhufnagel is offline  
post #52 of 77 Old 01-12-2014, 05:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mhufnagel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,040
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jedi Master View Post

CBS is the most watched network. They have shows like Hawaii Five O and Blue Bloods along with a lot of other good shows.

McDonalds sells more hamburgers than anyone else and Taco Bell is the biggest Mexican food chain. I wouldn't say that they have the best hamburgers or tacos. Would you?
mhufnagel is offline  
post #53 of 77 Old 01-12-2014, 07:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nayan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Melbourne, FL
Posts: 2,425
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 157
The big issue is the OP wants to save some money but still have sports. He could cut back his sat package to the cheapest they offer, he could go with someone else (maybe get a cable/internet bundle for savings) or he could just cut the cord. The big deciding factor, especially the cord-cutting and sports, will be the discussion in April over aereo. Two big networks have said that if aereo is allowed to operate they will pull ALL of their offerings and move them to cable. This means for cord-cutters, there will be no sports nor any other programming from CBS and Fox. While it might take awhile for a decision to come down it is certainly worth keeping in mind whether to cut the cord or not.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/11/business/media/supreme-court-to-hear-case-on-retransmission-of-tv-signals-by-aereo.html?_r=0

I'm a 'hooker' and a knitter. I guess that makes me bi-stitchual :).
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Nayan is offline  
post #54 of 77 Old 01-12-2014, 07:57 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: In the ATL
Posts: 4,331
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 231
I think they're bluffing, personally, and anticipate Congress getting involved if Aereo wins and they try to do it. Especially if it involves the Sunday NFL broadcasts.
slowbiscuit is offline  
post #55 of 77 Old 01-12-2014, 02:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Aleron Ives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,746
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 265 Post(s)
Liked: 345
I think CBS and Fox are bluffing, too. As the most-watched network, CBS would never pull its content off the air and sabotage itself in the process.
Aleron Ives is offline  
post #56 of 77 Old 01-12-2014, 03:02 PM
Advanced Member
 
veedon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Raleigh,NC
Posts: 773
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 153 Post(s)
Liked: 47

I'm just not that impressed with  shows like Breaking Bad and  that zombie show.

Do the young'uns really have extra money lying around to be spending on cable TV or buying shows from NetFlix and Hulu Plus? It seems to me that the young'uns should be switching to OTA and forgetting about cable, satellite, and streaming stuff to expensive tablet computers.

veedon is offline  
post #57 of 77 Old 01-12-2014, 03:57 PM
Advanced Member
 
crabboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Henderson, Nevada
Posts: 857
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by veedon View Post

I'm just not that impressed with  shows like Breaking Bad and  that zombie show.
Do the young'uns really have extra money lying around to be spending on cable TV or buying shows from NetFlix and Hulu Plus? It seems to me that the young'uns should be switching to OTA and forgetting about cable, satellite, and streaming stuff to expensive tablet computers.

And while they're at it, GET OFF MY LAWN!!!!

Veedon....you wouldn't actually be Drunk Uncle, would you? wink.gif

In space, no one can eat ice cream - Killer Klowns From Outer Space
crabboy is offline  
post #58 of 77 Old 01-12-2014, 04:53 PM
Advanced Member
 
veedon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Raleigh,NC
Posts: 773
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 153 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by crabboy View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by barrelbelly View Post

I'm seriously considering cutting the cord. .....What am I missing here?

Reality. As was mentioned before, not in this universe. It's nice to picture a customer uprising, but there's been @#*& on TV forever (vast wasteland, anyone?).
This is a good time for my Nursery Principle: If you stand at a checkout line in the plant department, sooner or later you'll see folks buying bags of cow (flop). If someone will buy it, someone will sell it. And lots of people pay for cable or satellite.
The revolution will not be televised because there will be no revolution.

 

But the cow (flop) helps things grow. What growth does the current sad state of basic cable TV promote?

You're right about TV having dreck for a long time, but I'd put the 1960-61 programming that Newton Minow criticized up against today's cable TV fare, and I dare say 1960-61 would win.

barrelbelly likes this.
veedon is offline  
post #59 of 77 Old 01-12-2014, 06:48 PM
Senior Member
 
borntocoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 282
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by veedon View Post

But the cow (flop) helps things grow. What growth does the current sad state of basic cable TV promote?
You're right about TV having dreck for a long time, but I'd put the 1960-61 programming that Newton Minow criticized up against today's cable TV fare, and I dare say 1960-61 would win.

What Newton Minow called a "Vast Wasteland" in 1960 is PARADISE compared to what's laughingly called "Programming" in this day and age. mad.gif
barrelbelly likes this.
borntocoast is offline  
post #60 of 77 Old 01-12-2014, 06:49 PM
Advanced Member
 
crabboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Henderson, Nevada
Posts: 857
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by veedon View Post

But the cow (flop) helps things grow. What growth does the current sad state of basic cable TV promote?
You're right about TV having dreck for a long time, but I'd put the 1960-61 programming that Newton Minow criticized up against today's cable TV fare, and I dare say 1960-61 would win.

The man knows his cow flop! cool.gif
It's not really fair to compare today's zillion channels with '61s three (if you could get them!) channels. (I grew up in Southern California, so I got 4 indies along with the networks, but not everyone did).
What the two eras have in common is that broadcasters were (and are) driven by profit, not quality. If quality sold better, we'd see more of it.
The "Golden Age" of TV had the advantage of naivete. Nobody really knew what would work/sell. Now they do.
I don't mean to harp on this, but it's basic capitalism. If no one watched the dreck, they'd yank it (Assets, anyone?). Duck Dynasty and it's controversy pointed out the power of a focus group.
Sports have gone to cable because the cable networks outpay the OTA networks.
How many things do we pay for that didn't exist in our childhoods? Internet access, DVD rental, cellphones (and cellphone service), data plans for our "smart" phones....and cable/satellite TV.
It's a new world, but human nature changes at a snail's pace.

In space, no one can eat ice cream - Killer Klowns From Outer Space
crabboy is offline  
Reply HDTV Programming

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off