or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › The Official "I dont have dish or cable" anymore thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Official "I dont have dish or cable" anymore thread - Page 47

post #1381 of 1689
Considering this is the HDTV forum, I think we should discuss what it requires AT A MINIMUM from the cable operator to receive High Definition service (i.e., locals). Then from there, I think it is reasonable to discuss what cost is required AT A MINIMUM to receive so called "basic" channels (ESPN, TBS, TNT, etc) in high definition.

As it is, the absolute minimum cost to receive ESPN HD on only one television and without a DVR is extremely high for most cable operators.
post #1382 of 1689
Quote:
Originally Posted by tighr View Post

Considering this is the HDTV forum, I think we should discuss what it requires AT A MINIMUM from the cable operator to receive High Definition service (i.e., locals). Then from there, I think it is reasonable to discuss what cost is required AT A MINIMUM to receive so called "basic" channels (ESPN, TBS, TNT, etc) in high definition.
As it is, the absolute minimum cost to receive ESPN HD on only one television and without a DVR is extremely high for most cable operators.

Yes, and that was kind of the point I was making. Who cares if I can get SD channels for $50/month or whatever. I invested in several HDTV's, therefore I consider HD service to be mandatory. With some service providers, you have to jump through hoops to get HD service without one of their rental boxes on each of your TVs. And furthermore HD has been readily available for well over a decade now in the USA, isn't getting to the point that charging extra is a bit ridiculous.
post #1383 of 1689
I have a huge HD lineup for my money, over 200 of them. Yes, I need a box to receive them all but since I only use one TV for viewing I only need one box. I too only want to view HD channels as that's why I have an HDTV.
post #1384 of 1689
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhufnagel View Post

Yes, I do know that this thread is about OTA tv. Like I've said before, there is nothing wrong with that. But there is no need to condemn pay-tv while you're praising free tv. People spend their money on what works for them. I could never go back to strictly ota. I would get more streaming services, and expand on my ota dvrs. I could never go back to "appointment" tv with vcrs (or even the Magnavox dvd recorders) for time shifting. But that would mean spending money for tv, something it seems you really hate to do.
I've never played a NCAA video game. Do they have a "franchise mode" like the pro games do? I just wonder how many SUV's a college goes through in recruiting players? tongue.gif

If you would have read through all my posts in this 47 page thread you would know my problem is paying high prices for poor programming. With the exception of classic TV on MeTV and football I'm unhappy with free TV as well but at least it is free and I'm not paying for programming that I don't want. I think Fox and ABC has some of the worst programming on the air. I also have a huge DVD collection to supplement OTA. But I've been finding so much on OTA TV that I haven't had my DVD player on since September.

The NCAA video game has dynasty mode where you can play with your favorite team. There is the regular season, the conference championship games, and the bowl games. Then after the season is over your seniors graduate and recruiting starts. Then you can recruit freshman for year 2 of your dynasty. You can also build a weak team into a powerhouse if you want. I've read on forums where people have played 20 seasons of dynasty mode with their favorite team. Also when you score your team's fight song plays. I've played NCAA 2003 thru 2008 and now I just started back in with NCAA 12.

The game also has an Auburn recruiting mode where you can pay $200,000 to get Cam Newton to come play for you. Just Kidding. biggrin.gif
post #1385 of 1689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nayan View Post

I have a huge HD lineup for my money, over 200 of them.
Really? You're getting a good deal for your money?

Let's compare! Take the number of HD channels you receive, divide by the number of dollars it costs you to receive them, and let's see what our cost ratios are. I did, and mine came out to UNDEFINED, because you can't divide by zero.
post #1386 of 1689
Quote:
I have a huge HD lineup for my money, over 200 of them.

And how many of those are BUG-FREE and commercial-free? How many show movies unedited in the proper format as well? (I've noticed HBO seems to be bug-free and doesn't even break into end credits anymore, but they usually show cropped versions of 2.35 movies so that's still unacceptable.)
post #1387 of 1689
Quote:
Originally Posted by lobosrul View Post

And furthermore HD has been readily available for well over a decade now in the USA, isn't getting to the point that charging extra is a bit ridiculous.

 

For those who can have satellite, Dish offers a 50-HD channel package (including ESPN, ESPN 2 and locals) for less than $35.


Edited by Rammitinski - 12/7/12 at 12:29am
post #1388 of 1689
Quote:
Originally Posted by tighr View Post

Really? You're getting a good deal for your money?
Let's compare! Take the number of HD channels you receive, divide by the number of dollars it costs you to receive them, and let's see what our cost ratios are. I did, and mine came out to UNDEFINED, because you can't divide by zero.

To answer your question I pay just under 30 cents for each channel. But to be fair, how many channels OTA do you actually receive in HD? I get two, one religious and one Spanish because that's all I can pick up via antenna.
post #1389 of 1689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nayan View Post

To answer your question I pay just under 30 cents for each channel. But to be fair, how many channels OTA do you actually receive in HD? I get two, one religious and one Spanish because that's all I can pick up via antenna.
To be fair, I'm getting all the locals (ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX) plus an additional FOX from Fresno. But, that's really all I need. I found I was watching stuff simply because it was on back when I had cable. I'd be up til 1am watching Modern Marvels or some such nonsense when I had to be at work the next day.
post #1390 of 1689

We have 9 full-powered stations, 8 with HD  -- the Big 5, plus ION, CW, MyN.   In SD, we have ThisTV, AntennaTV, MeTV, and RTV, which are ok for occasional viewing.   We used to get Universal Sports, until it went exclusively PayTV.

post #1391 of 1689
My family and I dropped our nearly $70/mo. satellite package last November, after I built an htpc to record shows that I had been getting OTA for a few years with an outdoor antenna. A few months ago, we finished paying off our van, so all of a sudden, we had a few hundred extra $$ each month, so I decided to give cable tv a try again. I found a good deal on a cablecard tuner, and after some initial setup pains, we had a lower-tier cable package integrated in Windows Media Center and supplementing our OTA channels. It was nice to have back some of the channels we used to enjoy, such as TBS, TNT, and USA. This added about $25/mo. to our internet cost, since they were bundled together.

The setup worked great for about two weeks, and then the cable channels went belly-up, with either a message saying that there was no tv signal detected, or that we were not subscribed to this or that particular channel, even though they were part of the package we were paying for. Several calls to Comcast customer service determined that a technician would have to come out to work on the problem, and there were no available appointments for almost two weeks.

By this time, my wife had had enough. She just wanted it to work, period. She had some initial qualms about dropping satellite service, but over the last year she has come to appreciate just how easy to use Media Center is, and with Netflix to supplement our OTA recordings, we have more to watch than we have time for. She was more than happy for me to give back the cablecard to Comcast, and now all is right with the world again.

Other than the $20 or $30 we spent that month on cable tv, I believe we have saved around $800 over the last year.
post #1392 of 1689
Quote:
Originally Posted by tighr View Post

Considering this is the HDTV forum, I think we should discuss what it requires AT A MINIMUM from the cable operator to receive High Definition service (i.e., locals). Then from there, I think it is reasonable to discuss what cost is required AT A MINIMUM to receive so called "basic" channels (ESPN, TBS, TNT, etc) in high definition.
As it is, the absolute minimum cost to receive ESPN HD on only one television and without a DVR is extremely high for most cable operators.
The problem is, you have a couple of members who constantly bring up watching DVDs and even VHS tapes as their alternatives. Plus, they include OTA networks that only show SD content.

As long as they make an argument that includes SD, I think it's fair to include any base level subscription service.

But, as has been noted, even with HD, you can still get TV service for well under $100 a month.
post #1393 of 1689
I admit to paying around $110 a month but this is the kitchen sink (ALL THE MOVIE CHANNELS) plus the highest English language programming tier (which includes showtime/TMC, Epix, and Cinemax ) HBO and Starz are extra but they are included in the $110 rate
post #1394 of 1689
I think, again, that some of you just have ACCESS to better deals than others. I have never added movie channels, but I did have a DVR and two receivers, and no matter what, either sat options that worked out to $100. I don't think two tuners is a luxury - I have two tvs... most people have way, way more. Also, DVRs I think are essential as well. So, for me, I have been able to duplicate both a DVR and two tv access for an outlay of cash (including all wiring, computer, tuner cards, remotes, antenna, etc.) for about $400. Many of you have access to competing cable companies - out here in a semi-rural area, I do not - I might get a low rate for the first year being a new customer or returning customer, but that runs out - a lot of you are quoting the introduction rate which goes away at some point. So you are left with switching - which is a hassle, in my opinion.

Its been a year and half cutting the cord, and I don't miss it - I love having a TV signal when it rains hard, and I love the virtually unlimited space my DVR has since I built it with a large HD. I can record more things since I have three tuners (six if you count subchannels), and with the Netflix streaming, along with Amazon to get the shows the we liked that were on cable, it has been great and a big savings.
post #1395 of 1689

A bonus when my old PC died this Fall was I replaced it with an HP S5-1260 with BD player and TV tuner, $450.  Its primary use is PC but it was essentially set up for me except for attaching antenna and initial channel scan.  It came with remote.  I can still use the computer while it's recording.  The WMC guide is nice, 2 full weeks, good descriptions,  and way faster than looking online.

post #1396 of 1689
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post


But, as has been noted, even with HD, you can still get TV service for well under $100 a month.

Cox Cable in my area charges over $80 a month for HD service and no DVR. This is with only one cable box. Add the DVR and its over $90 a month. This doesn't include the sports package that has the NFL Network, ESPNU and several others.
post #1397 of 1689
Study: Cord-Cutters and Cord-Nevers Will Soar to 17.2 Million U.S. Homes by 2017
Quote:
With the average tab for video services alone now over $80/month, affordability has emerged as a key pay-TV vulnerability. The primary culprit in driving up subscriber rates as been the surging monthly costs for programming that pay-TV operators bear. And as I’ve pointed out numerous times in the past, among the programmers, there’s no bigger cost driver than sports networks, both nationally and regionally focused.

The bad news for pay-TV’s future affordability, and one of the reasons I think TDG’s focus on cord-nevers and their price sensitivity is correct, is that TV sports rights continue to escalate dramaticaly. The latest deals by News Corp. to buy 49% of YES Network for nearly $2 billion and also likely pay $6-$7 billion for 25-year TV rights to the LA Dodgers (7 times more per season than it currently pays), plus ESPN’s $7.3 billion to lock up college football’s BCS playoffs, Sugar, Orange and Rose Bowls, are among the latest contributors to the mania around TV sports rights.

http://www.antennasdirect.com/blog/study-cord-cutters-and-cord-nevers-will-soar-to-17-2-million-u-s-homes-by-2017/
post #1398 of 1689
This may sound crazy and i admit not knowing the intricacies of the corporate world w.r.t TV content providers : don't you think it is painfully unfair that people in one part of the world have access to awesome TV at a reasonable price whilst others elsewhere pay a lot for TV that sucks?

My dream is TV "without borders/limits" where the end user can subscribe to tv provided by anyone/anywhere (legally) and not be at the mercy of local providers who charge you as much as they like mad.gif I suppose certain laws/practices need to be changed? Do you think i am smoking too much of the good stuff or can this dream be realized in our lifetimes?
Edited by whentrumpetsfade - 12/11/12 at 7:14am
post #1399 of 1689
Quote:
Originally Posted by whentrumpetsfade View Post

This may sound crazy and i admit not knowing the intricacies of the corporate world w.r.t TV content providers : don't you think it is painfully unfair that people in one part of the world have access to awesome TV at a reasonable price whilst others elsewhere pay a lot for TV that sucks?
My dream is TV "without borders/limits" where the end user can subscribe to tv provided by anyone/anywhere (legally) and not be at the mercy of local providers who charge you as much as they like mad.gif I suppose certain laws/practices need to be changed? Do you think i am smoking too much of the good stuff or can this dream be realized in our lifetimes?

I don't... I think if enough consumers start boycotting these prices and policies, that eventually an ala carte system can be in place - even down to specific shows through streaming...
post #1400 of 1689
What's funny about sports being the driving factor in rising pay-tv costs is that I watch SUBSTANTIALLY more sports than most of my friends do, and I pay $0/mo for TV.
post #1401 of 1689
According to Mediapost another 460,000 Households "Cut the Cord" during the third quarter of this year. That's 3,000,000 households since 2010 eek.gif

I'm sure the High Prices, Shoddy Programming and Excessive Advertising didn't contribute to this, did it?. mad.gif
post #1402 of 1689
Quote:
Originally Posted by whentrumpetsfade View Post

This may sound crazy and i admit not knowing the intricacies of the corporate world w.r.t TV content providers : don't you think it is painfully unfair that people in one part of the world have access to awesome TV at a reasonable price whilst others elsewhere pay a lot for TV that sucks?
My dream is TV "without borders/limits" where the end user can subscribe to tv provided by anyone/anywhere (legally) and not be at the mercy of local providers who charge you as much as they like mad.gif I suppose certain laws/practices need to be changed? Do you think i am smoking too much of the good stuff or can this dream be realized in our lifetimes?

The Golden Age of TV was the 50s through the 80s. TV was done right during that time. But since the early to mid 2000s corporate greed has ruined TV.
post #1403 of 1689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jedi Master View Post

The Golden Age of TV was the 50s through the 80s. TV was done right during that time. But since the early to mid 2000s corporate greed has ruined TV.

IMO TV "Jumped the Shark" when ABC aired Who Wants To Be A Millionaire across several nights each week, knocking out several Scripted TV Shows. I could see through the glitz, and realized this was a cheaply-produced TV Show. Then CBS introduced Survivor which was another cheaply-produced "unscripted" series. As the years went by "Reality" and Game shows replaced more and more decent TV Shows. I turned to Cable, there were three Channels that I could rely on if the others didn't have anything, mainly The Discovery Channel, The Learning Channel and the History Channel. Alas, they were to cease becoming "Havens" when the 'Reality" Bug bit them as well. I also noticed the commercial breaks were getting longer, and many commercials insulted or offended me (If I were a member of a Minority, my complaints would IMMEDIATELY result in the commercial getting yanked, but because I am a W.A.S.P., my complaints get shoved aside with the "Constitutional Rights" Spiel). Fortunately, the Prices for DVD Box Sets of my favorite shows went down, and I realized it was actually cheaper for me to get my shows this way than I could through a paid subscription. At the end of 2006 I "Cut the Cord", and I enjoy watching TV my way, with no offensive programming or commercials to ruin my viewing. tongue.gif
post #1404 of 1689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jedi Master View Post

Cox Cable in my area charges over $80 a month for HD service and no DVR. This is with only one cable box. Add the DVR and its over $90 a month. This doesn't include the sports package that has the NFL Network, ESPNU and several others.
See, and that's what I have a problem with in these discussions.

The cord cutters always start lumping stuff onto the subscriptions that they would never have after cutting the cord, then say, "see how expensive cable is?". First it's "I need and other box", then 'I need a DVR" and now it's "I need a sports pack". Still others start lumping in movie channels.

Other than a standalone DVR (which you could also use with cable), please tell me what all you think you'd be getting if you cut the cord? You're not going to get that sports package without cable, so if cost is a factor, why would you plunk down for it with cable? You can still hook your antenna up to as many extra TVs as you want, so how often are you really going to need a second box? I had a second box for the bedroom TV. I found I almost never turned the thing on - and certainly didn't watch a different show on it than I could view on the main TV.

That's my gripe. You guys never compare apples to apples. You want to compare an apple and the entire fruit salad.

I pay around $100 for my service, but that's for everything except the option giant sports pack, special sports subscriptions (like Sunday Ticket) and the movie channels. I could easily save myself a good $35 or more a month, even with the DVR and HD service. Oh, and I would absolutely still have ESPN.
post #1405 of 1689
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

See, and that's what I have a problem with in these discussions.
The cord cutters always start lumping stuff onto the subscriptions that they would never have after cutting the cord, then say, "see how expensive cable is?". First it's "I need and other box", then 'I need a DVR" and now it's "I need a sports pack". Still others start lumping in movie channels.
Other than a standalone DVR (which you could also use with cable), please tell me what all you think you'd be getting if you cut the cord? You're not going to get that sports package without cable, so if cost is a factor, why would you plunk down for it with cable? You can still hook your antenna up to as many extra TVs as you want, so how often are you really going to need a second box? I had a second box for the bedroom TV. I found I almost never turned the thing on - and certainly didn't watch a different show on it than I could view on the main TV.
That's my gripe. You guys never compare apples to apples. You want to compare an apple and the entire fruit salad.
I pay around $100 for my service, but that's for everything except the option giant sports pack, special sports subscriptions (like Sunday Ticket) and the movie channels. I could easily save myself a good $35 or more a month, even with the DVR and HD service. Oh, and I would absolutely still have ESPN.

Cord-cutting isn't for everyone. My family and I have only had pay-tv for the last three years (Dish), my oldest son is now 20 yrs old. I really think cord cutting really works for people who aren't fanantics about non-NFL pro sports or the BCS bowls. Although the NCAA BB tournament now shows a lot on pay-tv. Anyway, you're right, there is no way out of paying something to get your entertainment from outside the "Big 4" broadcast networks (unless you enjoy old and tired reruns on networks like This or METV and an awful lot of that stuff is on Netflix or Hulu).

We spent plenty of money buying and renting vhs/dvd's during those years, although it wasn't anywhere near what we currently pay for tv. I figured out that we could get away with cord-cutting, but it would still cost us around $40 per month when I priced out all of the various services. And my wife (whose father was an accountant) says we have to include the dvr costs when we figure things out, raising the cost about $10 more per month for two years (already have a WMC extender, so don't have to buy that). I had an ota dvr and Netflix (3 movies out plus streaming) before we signed on with Dish, so it can be done, as long as you don't need to watch a lot of stuff for a year. Although with a dvd plan, you get to watch movies months before they come out on HBO or Starz.
post #1406 of 1689
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

That's my gripe. You guys never compare apples to apples. You want to compare an apple and the entire fruit salad.
I pay around $100 for my service, but that's for everything except the option giant sports pack, special sports subscriptions (like Sunday Ticket) and the movie channels. I could easily save myself a good $35 or more a month, even with the DVR and HD service. Oh, and I would absolutely still have ESPN.
Yes, and it's always a blanket claim - OMG cable costs $100 a month!! or something equally inaccurate, because all they look at is the rate sheet.

I pay $80 for all channels and 20mb internet with Comcast, which I think is a damn good deal, and have for a few years now. But I'm willing to call and play one provider off another when my promo runs out, and/or escalate to corporate if I don't get a deal I want. People that just roll over and take whatever they feel like charging are acting like sheep, IMO, and that's what the providers are counting on. Same for car/home insurance, buying a car, etc.

If you're not willing to deal, don't come here whining about the cost of TV.
post #1407 of 1689
Why are people badgering cord cutters in The Official "I don't have dish or cable" anymore thread? Shouldn't this thread be a safe haven for those who have cut the cord to discuss the topic with other cord cutters? Why do people who have satellite or cable care what the cord cutters are discussing in their own thread?

I'm just asking, because it seems rather rude to me.
post #1408 of 1689
Quote:
Originally Posted by NetworkTV View Post

See, and that's what I have a problem with in these discussions.
The cord cutters always start lumping stuff onto the subscriptions that they would never have after cutting the cord, then say, "see how expensive cable is?". First it's "I need and other box", then 'I need a DVR" and now it's "I need a sports pack". Still others start lumping in movie channels.
Because if DVR, sports pack, or movie channels are your goal, then the cost of basic cable is still a barrier to entry. I would love to call up Brighthouse tomorrow and tell them I will give them $20/mo for access to the Sports pack and only the sports pack, because that's what they tell me it costs. They will laugh in my face and say it only costs $20/mo if I already subscribed to their basic cable with fifty billion other channels I'll never watch.

Instead, I'll pay $0 and get none of those things (well, my computer is my OTA DVR, so at least I have that).

That's why up thread, I made the post about discussing what the minimum costs for receiving basic locals in HD from a cable provider is... and the cheapest you can get that option is usually around $80/mo because it by default includes a bunch of other crap you don't really want.
post #1409 of 1689
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomhunter8 View Post

Why are people badgering cord cutters in The Official "I don't have dish or cable" anymore thread? Shouldn't this thread be a safe haven for those who have cut the cord to discuss the topic with other cord cutters? Why do people who have satellite or cable care what the cord cutters are discussing in their own thread?
I'm just asking, because it seems rather rude to me.
Because people in this thread keep showing up in HotP to tell us all how paying for TV is stupid (repeatedly, even though they've been asked to stop), and there's tons of misinformation in this thread anyway. You call it badgering but it's more like correcting obvious exaggerations, usually.
post #1410 of 1689
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomhunter8 View Post

Why are people badgering cord cutters in The Official "I don't have dish or cable" anymore thread? Shouldn't this thread be a safe haven for those who have cut the cord to discuss the topic with other cord cutters? Why do people who have satellite or cable care what the cord cutters are discussing in their own thread?
I'm just asking, because it seems rather rude to me.
No.

It should be a dsicussion about the merits and issues with it, and that includes accurate information about what people should expect to pay or not pay on either end of it. People need to know how much alternate services cost along with standalone equipment just like they need to know ways they can save on what they already have.

Touting a price point as the default for service that isn't true does a disservice to those who might consider the option of reducing the price they pay rather than dumping everything. It's important for people to know about their options, which include more than "the works" or "almost nothing".

To draw a line and say cutting the cord is the only option compared to paying an outlandish price is going to result in your being called on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tighr View Post

Because if DVR, sports pack, or movie channels are your goal, then the cost of basic cable is still a barrier to entry. I would love to call up Brighthouse tomorrow and tell them I will give them $20/mo for access to the Sports pack and only the sports pack, because that's what they tell me it costs. They will laugh in my face and say it only costs $20/mo if I already subscribed to their basic cable with fifty billion other channels I'll never watch.
Instead, I'll pay $0 and get none of those things (well, my computer is my OTA DVR, so at least I have that).
That's why up thread, I made the post about discussing what the minimum costs for receiving basic locals in HD from a cable provider is... and the cheapest you can get that option is usually around $80/mo because it by default includes a bunch of other crap you don't really want.
Except I made it clear that isn't my goal, and many made it clear that they don't want to pay for sports channels they claim they don't watch. So, when they get lumped into the price as an example of those high prices, it does those who may want to receive other content any favors to think they don't have a choice.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: HDTV Programming
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › HDTV Programming › The Official "I dont have dish or cable" anymore thread