Recently, arguments for new pricing on cable television, specifically so-called “a la carte” models, have been making news. The cable providers argue that doing so would make cable super expensive, while consumers state that they are paying for channels they don’t want and not getting others that they do want, purely because of bundles of channels that they are forced into.
A reader writes in with a link to a Wired article by Michael Grebb that states that some industry insiders are “expressing skepticism that [a la carte pricing] would destroy the economics of the industry.”
1 response so far ↓
1 Jonathan Rintels // Aug 7, 2004 at 5:11 pm
In a reply to the Wired article you cite above that was also printed by Wired, this satisfied customer in Canada who is ALREADY getting her channels a la carte wrote:
Date: 07/15/2004 09:01 AM
From: Sarah Szefer (sarah.szefer@sympatico.ca)
Subject: Cable Debate Generates Static
Regarding the whole debate about a la carte channel subscriptions (”Cable Debate Generates Static,” July 15, 2004): I live in Montreal, Canada, where 4 cable/satellite providers are in the market: Videotron, Bell ExpressVu, LookTV and StarChoice.
I have a digital cable subscription to Videotron ’s illico service and I have an a la carte channel subscription, plus one thematic subscription (the U.S. superstations: WGN, WSBK, WPIX and KTLA).
Videotron offers traditional thematic packages, but it is also possible to subscribe to channels via an a la carte subscription (either pay for each individual channel or buy packs of 5, 10 or 20 channels). The only true restriction is that the customer must subscribe to the basic cable lineup and that more than half the channels must be Canadian (which is a CRTC rule).
I love being able to pick only the stations I want; for instance, only yesterday we dumped MSNBC and replaced it with G4TechTV Canada, among other swaps. I might not have picked up G4TechTV if I would have had to get it through a package that included channels that don’t interest me.