# New Rates? HBO Increase - It Pays to Complain



## Lazy Senior (Jan 24, 2005)

I, along with many customers am *tired of constant increases* in my TV costs. It *has* gotten to the point where TV service is not a good value or worth what I pay for it. The new rates starting in Feb 2013 really made me look at how to cut my costs.

So I called Directv this morning. I was going to cancel Whole Home DVR service which I never use and cancel HBO.

Now I really like HBO and have had it for a very long time - since the late 80's in fact. However HBO is just not worth $18 a month. At least it is not worth that amount to me.

Low and behold the very nice CSR lady at Directv offered me HBO for 6 months at 10.99 a month. Now this is more like it. HBO is worth 10.99 a month. At the end of this 6 month promotion the lady told me to call back and cancel HBO. She "suggested" I might be offered the promotion for another 6 months. 

So I have been paying $15.99 a month for HBO. Now I am going to pay $10.99 a month - a savings of $30 (from what I have been paying) over a 6 month promotion.

The new HBO price starting in Feb 2013 is increasing $2 a month or $24 over a one year period.

Does this make any sense for Directv or HBO??

All I know for sure is as much as I like HBO I am NOT going to pay $18 a month for it!


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

It's fair to assume that most folks prefer not to pay higher prices.

That said...there's already a long thread on this same topic here :

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=211512


----------



## Lazy Senior (Jan 24, 2005)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> It's fair to assume that most folks prefer not to pay higher prices.
> 
> That said...there's already a long thread on this same topic here :
> 
> http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=211512


This topic was about saving $5 a month. Not sitting back and doing nothing and paying higher prices. As long as the vast majority of Directv customers continue to pay whatever increases Directv dictates, prices will continue to rise.

Only when customers start saying *enough is enough* and start exercising their right to cancel Directv services will the situation change.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Lazy Senior said:


> This topic was about saving $5 a month. Not sitting back and doing nothing and paying higher prices. As long as the vast majority of Directv customers continue to pay whatever increases Directv dictates, prices will continue to rise.
> 
> Only when customers start saying *enough is enough* and start exercising their right to cancel Directv services will the situation change.


No doubt higher prices impact everyone differently, and few folks welcome paying them. Glad to hear you got some cost relief.

Still...it's an existing thread topic of discussion...


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

Lazy Senior said:


> As long as the vast majority of Directv customers continue to pay whatever increases Directv dictates, prices will continue to rise.
> 
> Only when customers start saying *enough is enough* and start exercising their right to cancel Directv services will the situation change.


And if you believe that I have swamp land to sell you.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

RunnerFL said:


> And if you believe that I have swamp land to sell you.


Yeah...a number of us realize that any potential changes to the cycle of higher prices must start with the source of those higher prices - the greed of the content providers (channel groups, local stations, and networks).

If we learn how to crack that nut...


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

"Lazy Senior" said:


> I, along with many customers am tired of constant increases in my TV costs. It has gotten to the point where TV service is not a good value or worth what I pay for it. The new rates starting in Feb 2013 really made me look at how to cut my costs.
> 
> So I called Directv this morning. I was going to cancel Whole Home DVR service which I never use and cancel HBO.
> 
> ...


The rates that content owners charge service providers continues to rise. I blame the content owners, not the providers.


----------



## Lazy Senior (Jan 24, 2005)

RunnerFL said:


> And if you believe that I have swamp land to sell you.


Really. What would happen if on Feb 1 2013 if Ten million Directv customers called in to cancel? :lol:

Let's face it - TV service is NOT a necessity. Every year the TV providers raise their rates. *Every year*. And every year the forum is loaded with people complaining about higher rates.

The TV providers do not care. They know they can keep on rasiing rates because the majority of customers will go right on paying whatever they ask.

At what point do the rates become too high for the customer to continue paying them? It will never become too high as long as customers believe they can do nothing about it.....


----------



## jdh8668 (Nov 7, 2007)

At $18 a month you could wait for the entire series to come out on dvd and it would be far cheaper.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

"Lazy Senior" said:


> Really. What would happen if on Feb 1 2013 if Ten million Directv customers called in to cancel? :lol:
> 
> Let's face it - TV service is NOT a necessity. Every year the TV providers raise their rates. Every year. And every year the forum is loaded with people complaining about higher rates.
> 
> ...


If directv didn't care, then why didn't they raise rates on all the packages? It's not directv, time Warner, even Comcast that's the issue, it is the content owners that want more and more money. DirecTV can only reign them in so much.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Lazy Senior said:


> Really. What would happen if on Feb 1 2013 if Ten million Directv customers called in to cancel? :lol:
> 
> Let's face it - TV service is NOT a necessity. Every year the TV providers raise their rates. *Every year*. And every year the forum is loaded with people complaining about higher rates.
> 
> ...


Not true at all, this latter point. Many people cancel out providers for a hundred reasons, one of which is high costs.

Is TV a necessity? In my household it is. More so than a $4.00 cappuccino at Peet's Coffee. Arguably, neither are necessities for survival, but I think most of us are free to define what's a necessity in our own worlds.

I'd say the providers do care quite a bit, realizing that the golden goose is threatened by ever increasing prices. DIRECTV® is battling against same, but can't tell every content provider to take a hike.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Yeah...a number of us realize that any potential changes to the cycle of higher prices must start with the source of those higher prices - the greed of the content providers (channel groups, local stations, and networks).
> 
> If we learn how to crack that nut...


Exactly. It's not as if DirecTV, or any other provider of any service, is just randomly deciding to up their fees. They are being charged more and must pass on some of that cost to its customers. Do we have to like it? No... Is it part of life? Yes.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

Lazy Senior said:


> Really. What would happen if on Feb 1 2013 if Ten million Directv customers called in to cancel? :lol:


That would never happen.



Lazy Senior said:


> Let's face it - TV service is NOT a necessity. Every year the TV providers raise their rates. *Every year*. And every year the forum is loaded with people complaining about higher rates.


It's called "the cost of living". Look it up. EVERYONE's cost of living increases EVERY year. It's part of being a living being.



Lazy Senior said:


> The TV providers do not care.


Yeah, that's why DirecTV turned off the Viacom channels when Viacom demanded more money, because they didn't care.



Lazy Senior said:


> They know they can keep on rasiing rates because the majority of customers will go right on paying whatever they ask.


You don't have to you know...



Lazy Senior said:


> At what point do the rates become too high for the customer to continue paying them? It will never become too high as long as customers believe they can do nothing about it.....


So DirecTV should just absorb all of the increases they face? Yeah, they'd be out of business pretty quick the way the networks are demanding higher carriage fees.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

jdh8668 said:


> At $18 a month you could wait for the entire series to come out on dvd and it would be far cheaper.


Multiply that $18 by every show you watch...

Oh, and I challenge you to find an HBO series that costs less than $50 to $60 per season to own on disc.


----------



## Lazy Senior (Jan 24, 2005)

RunnerFL said:


> So DirecTV should just absorb all of the increases they face?


They should not agree to the increases to start with. As a TV consumer I can not deal directly with the content provider. I can however deal with Directv.

I do have a choice. Fortunately for me DirectTV is NOT a necessity. I could go on living just fine with only OTA (free) and Netflix streaming (a huge Value at only $8 a month) and an occasional cheap Redbox rental. In fact since I currently spend close to $100 a month on Directv I could even splurge a little on a few VUDU rentals and buy some BlueRay DVD's - and still save $$ over what I am paying now to DTV.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Well, you can get them in HD at Apple's iTunes store for about $35/season.


----------



## Lazy Senior (Jan 24, 2005)

What would happen if on Feb 1 2013 if Ten million Directv customers called in to cancel?



RunnerFL said:


> That would never happen.


Exactly right. And it is one of the reasons our DTV prices will never stop going up every year.


----------



## Lazy Senior (Jan 24, 2005)

RunnerFL said:


> It's called "the cost of living". Look it up. EVERYONE's cost of living increases EVERY year. It's part of being a living being.


The problem of course everyone's wages do not go up every year. In fact many wages are going down or even worse - no job at all.

Soon or later many people have to start cutting costs somewhere. Yes, unfortunately in todays world - "It's part of being a living being."


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

"Lazy Senior" said:


> They should not agree to the increases to start with. As a TV consumer I can not deal directly with the content provider. I can however deal with Directv.
> 
> I do have a choice. Fortunately for me DirectTV is NOT a necessity. I could go on living just fine with only OTA (free) and Netflix streaming (a huge Value at only $8 a month) and an occasional cheap Redbox rental. In fact since I currently spend close to $100 a month on Directv I could even splurge a little on a few VUDU rentals and buy some BlueRay DVD's - and still save $$ over what I am paying now to DTV.


And if they said we would not allow a price increase from the content provider, then the provider will drop coverage, directv would lose a lot more customers (especially when they lose locals and big conglomerates) and go out of business. Someone would fold, but a content provider would not accept no price increases, ever. Eventually they would increase the price DirecTV pays.

Only way to avoid price increases is to get rid of paid TV, no Netflix etc, go OTA only.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Lazy Senior said:


> They should not agree to the increases to start with. As a TV consumer I can not deal directly with the content provider. I can however deal with DirecTV.
> 
> I do have a choice. Fortunately for me DirecTV is NOT a necessity. I could go on living just fine with only OTA (free) and Netflix streaming (a huge Value at only $8 a month) and an occasional cheap Redbox rental. In fact since I currently spend close to $100 a month on DirecTV I could even splurge a little on a few VUDU rentals and buy some BlueRay DVD's - and still save $$ over what I am paying now to DTV.


I suspect everyone is empathetic to your point about the high cost of Pay TV...but the fact of the matter is that DirecTV and other providers DO NEGOTIATE vigorously to keep costs down to the minimum.

There is no advantage to DirecTV to raise your rates (or anyone else's) in terms of trying to keep customers happy.

If people spent 1/100th of their time calling, writing, or e-mailing their local stations, the major TV networks, the ESPN group, Tribune group, Turner group, and Viacom group conglomerates of the world that they do posting here about annual rate increases...things might be start to change.

Fact is as long as those companies continue their greedy profit-gouging practices for channel content pricing, and hold delivery services hostage (as well as consumers), things won't be different. Even "free" OTA TV will go away in the near future.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

Lazy Senior said:


> They should not agree to the increases to start with.


And they'd be out of business fairly quickly with that attitude. What good would they be with no content?



Lazy Senior said:


> As a TV consumer I can not deal directly with the content provider. I can however deal with Directv.


Then do so... In fact why not cancel every account you have with a provider that increases rates... Oh yeah, you'd be living in a box if you did.



Lazy Senior said:


> I do have a choice.


Sure, between provider A who raises their rates every year and provider B who also raises their rates every year.



Lazy Senior said:


> Fortunately for me DirectTV is NOT a necessity. I could go on living just fine with only OTA (free) and Netflix streaming (a huge Value at only $8 a month) and an occasional cheap Redbox rental. In fact since I currently spend close to $100 a month on Directv I could even splurge a little on a few VUDU rentals and buy some BlueRay DVD's - and still save $$ over what I am paying now to DTV.


Nah, then you'd just complain when Netflix and Redbox raised their rates.

I don't get how people single out DirecTV and act as if they are the only company that ever raises rates... :shrug:


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

Lazy Senior said:


> Exactly right. And it is one of the reasons our DTV prices will never stop going up every year.


And neither will ANYONE else's. Not sure how you don't get that.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

RunnerFL said:


> And neither will ANYONE else's. Not sure how you don't get that.


Let me know when you find something that's getting cheaper each year - anything - I wanna buy a truckload.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Let me know when you find something that's getting cheaper each year - anything - I wanna buy a truckload.


Yeah, no kidding!

I've never in my life heard someone say "Those were so much more expensive when I was your age".


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

RunnerFL said:


> Yeah, no kidding!


Swampland doesn't count.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

"RunnerFL" said:


> Nah, then you'd just complain when Netflix and Redbox raised their rates.
> :


Don't forget data caps, or increase in Internet access price.

I was actually surprised when Redbox increased DVD prices 20% that they didn't raise Blu-Ray prices.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Swampland doesn't count.


Even that has been going up. :lol:


----------



## HinterXGames (Dec 20, 2012)

I will say out of all the Premiums, with HBO increasing, at least the content they provide is high quality. Really, HBO is the standard in original series production, and there's a reason why they have some of the most popular ones out there, even in comparison to showtime.


----------



## 242424 (Mar 22, 2012)

Fans are on high in this thread. lol


----------



## joshjr (Aug 2, 2008)

RunnerFL said:


> Multiply that $18 by every show you watch...
> 
> Oh, and I challenge you to find an HBO series that costs less than $50 to $60 per season to own on disc.


Sorry, I had to. This is a current show that is selling at a lower than $50 price tag.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Boardwa...26833.p?id=2369019&skuId=4026833&st=boardwalk empire&lp=1&cp=1


----------



## Eddie501 (Nov 29, 2007)

Does anyone know if you can subscribe ONLY to the premium channels? And drop the 'choice' package? It irritates me more & more to have to pay so much money for a package of programming that is 30% Geico & Progressive commericals. And the actual programming is foolishness like real housewives and 50 most shocking whatevers. But I need my HBO & Showtime programs.

Will DirecTV allow this or do you have to have a base package to reach the premiums?


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

joshjr said:


> Sorry, I had to. This is a current show that is selling at a lower than $50 price tag.
> 
> http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Boardwa...26833.p?id=2369019&skuId=4026833&st=boardwalk empire&lp=1&cp=1


Not by much and clearly over $18.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

"Eddie501" said:


> Does anyone know if you can subscribe ONLY to the premium channels? And drop the 'choice' package? It irritates me more & more to have to pay so much money for a package of programming that is 30% Geico & Progressive commericals. And the actual programming is foolishness like real housewives and 50 most shocking whatevers. But I need my HBO & Showtime programs.
> 
> Will DirecTV allow this or do you have to have a base package to reach the premiums?


You have to have a base package, like Entertainment. Not sure if its available with the Family package.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

Eddie501 said:


> Does anyone know if you can subscribe ONLY to the premium channels? And drop the 'choice' package? It irritates me more & more to have to pay so much money for a package of programming that is 30% Geico & Progressive commericals. And the actual programming is foolishness like real housewives and 50 most shocking whatevers. But I need my HBO & Showtime programs.
> 
> Will DirecTV allow this or do you have to have a base package to reach the premiums?


Pretty sure you need a base package. They do, however, have some pretty stripped down base packages for like $29 I think. You need to call and ask for them, they arent advertised. One used to be called SELECT. It was replaced by something else of similar name, but about the same price.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Ad if you are getting free HD, that goes out the window if you drop too far. Even just getting HBO and Family, with HD you are still talking $60, without DVR etc.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

Eddie501 said:


> Does anyone know if you can subscribe ONLY to the premium channels? And drop the 'choice' package? It irritates me more & more to have to pay so much money for a package of programming that is 30% Geico & Progressive commericals. And the actual programming is foolishness like real housewives and 50 most shocking whatevers. But I need my HBO & Showtime programs.
> 
> Will DirecTV allow this or do you have to have a base package to reach the premiums?


Must have base package


----------



## Barcthespark (Dec 16, 2007)

I completely agree the biggest driving force behind the customer price increase is the higher fees being required by content owners. However, lets not be naive. The number one priority of D* is stockholders, not customers.

Some posters keep repeating that D* fights to keep customer costs down. This is only true to the point that it benefits, not hurts profit margins for stockholders. As much as we the customer would like to think we are the primary reason D* makes content and price decisions, we are not. That is why no matter how much we complain on forums such as this, we have very little influence on D*. The only time customers have any power is when they organize en masse to make a statement and I think we all know that just isn't going to happen in this situation.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Heeeeeee's baaaaaack......fits the thread.......


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

RunnerFL said:


> Yeah, no kidding!
> 
> I've never in my life heard someone say "Those were so much more expensive when I was your age".


I paid 700.00 + installation cost for my first Motorola wireless phone that you just made calls on - 5 watts of transmit recieve power, for christmas I paid full retail price for my 12 yr olds phone that does the exact same thing - paid 49.99 for it.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

wingrider01 said:


> I paid 700.00 + installation cost for my first Motorola wireless phone that you just made calls on - 5 watts of transmit recieve power, for christmas I paid full retail price for my 12 yr olds phone that does the exact same thing - paid 49.99 for it.


That's a device, not a service though.


----------



## kaminar (Mar 25, 2012)

wingrider01 said:


> I paid 700.00 + installation cost for my first Motorola wireless phone that you just made calls on - 5 watts of transmit recieve power, for christmas I paid full retail price for my 12 yr olds phone that does the exact same thing - paid 49.99 for it.


FCC SAR limit is 1.6W/Kg..max was more like 3W back in the 90s and 0.6W (motorola) today..just sayin..

-=K=-


----------



## kaminar (Mar 25, 2012)

Eddie501 said:


> Does anyone know if you can subscribe ONLY to the premium channels? And drop the 'choice' package? It irritates me more & more to have to pay so much money for a package of programming that is 30% Geico & Progressive commericals. And the actual programming is foolishness like real housewives and 50 most shocking whatevers. But I need my HBO & Showtime programs.
> 
> Will DirecTV allow this or do you have to have a base package to reach the premiums?


Base package required..if other channels are not necessary, definitely go for the Entertainment package ($29.99/mth incl 1 rcvr--approx 160 chans if you want them--Advanced Receiver, Addl receivers, HD, etc are extra..)..3 months free of Premium networks (47+ channels), then $45/mth addl for those channels..approx $74.99/mth + upgrades for year one..not including any discounts..

-=K=-


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

Barcthespark said:


> I completely agree the biggest driving force behind the customer price increase is the higher fees being required by content owners. However, lets not be naive. The number one priority of D* is stockholders, not customers.


I don't agree with this. I have to live it everyday with our management and they push hard that there are multiple priorities. Of course stockholders are one, but customers is every bit at the top of the food chain. If it wasn't, there are many areas the company spends money on that they wouldn't but only do so to keep customers happy and the product moving forward.

I've worked at a number of Fortune 500 companies and some are definitely stockholder first. I do not put D* in that group. It is possible to serve both, and in fact it can be done where it yields fruitful results for both.


----------



## Barcthespark (Dec 16, 2007)

Satelliteracer said:


> I don't agree with this. I have to live it everyday with our management and they push hard that there are multiple priorities. Of course stockholders are one, but customers is every bit at the top of the food chain. If it wasn't, there are many areas the company spends money on that they wouldn't but only do so to keep customers happy and the product moving forward.
> 
> I've worked at a number of Fortune 500 companies and some are definitely stockholder first. I do not put D* in that group. It is possible to serve both, and in fact it can be done where it yields fruitful results for both.


That's good to know. Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## loudo (Mar 24, 2005)

As much as we all hate them, yearly price increases are on any satellite or cable service. It is like Christmas, you know it is going to be a yearly event.


----------



## haddock (Oct 30, 2012)

RunnerFL said:


> Not by much and clearly over $18.


Not meaning to fan any flames, but I dont think the point was that you could get a series for $18, but rather was to compare the yearly HBO price of $216 ($18 per month for 12 months) to what you might spend that $ on instead.

Consistent to the OP of this point, you could buy full seasons of 4-6 shows on DVD for the same $ you spend in a year on HBO. If you have to have your HBO for that 1 show (or even 2 or 3) then you are potentially wasting money paying $18 a month for it. If you watch a ton of HBO programming, then perhaps you get you $'s worth from the subscription.

I like HBO, and feel they have a lot of high end content. However, I'm in that camp that just doesn't consistently get $216 a year of value from it. If I'm lucky, I have time to consistently watch maybe 5 shows total across all networks, so I don't feel I have the time to get enough value from a single network to justify spending extra $ for it. I can spend half that much in a year on select movie rentals/ppv purchases along with Netflix or select DVDs and get more value (perceived by me) than I would if I paid the $ to subscribe to HBO.


----------



## Chrismon1001 (Apr 3, 2011)

I don't have a huge problem with the increase then again I'm also a premier sub so its not going up for me (yet)... But that said I would be happy to continue paying for HBO up to maybe even at 23-25 a month.... I don't find as much value in Cinemax, or Starz so probably around 15-17 max for now on it, and Showtime would sit around 18-20 a month. Maybe this is just me, but I find huge value in these channels for the series, and will compensate them for there great job. I don't even watch movies much on them.... but others in my house do so it's used for that reason also.


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

Lazy Senior said:


> They should not agree to the increases to start with. As a TV consumer I can not deal directly with the content provider. I can however deal with Directv.
> 
> I do have a choice. Fortunately for me DirectTV is NOT a necessity. I could go on living just fine with only OTA (free) and Netflix streaming (a huge Value at only $8 a month) and an occasional cheap Redbox rental. In fact since I currently spend close to $100 a month on Directv I could even splurge a little on a few VUDU rentals and buy some BlueRay DVD's - and still save $$ over what I am paying now to DTV.


Then why don't you do that? :sure:


----------



## dudester (Feb 16, 2012)

If direct is loosing so much money by giving the op a discount since its the providers they have to pay, why are they so quick to give the discount? If my business would lose money by providing the dicount i would have let the op cancel. I have the premier nad am grandfathered on a few things however, i also know some people that have the same package and do not have he grandfathering and their bill is the same as mine. Same number of dvrs except a little newer.i am getting tired ofhe message service telling me hey free starz, showtimetime etc, when i am paying for it already in my premier package. If they are going to give away free service they should pop up with a auto discount for the subscrbers that are paying during the free service i have had directv for a while now and it has been relativly good , butball my boxes are getting old, and with the new technology out there , it isnt really worth paying 200 a month for tv service anymore. Really, is there actually anything being broadcast now, that youre looking foward to watching. Thats the boat i'm in and is starting to take on water.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

dudester said:


> If direct is loosing so much money by giving the op a discount since its the providers they have to pay, why are they so quick to give the discount? If my business would lose money by providing the dicount i would have let the op cancel. I have the premier nad am grandfathered on a few things however, i also know some people that have the same package and do not have he grandfathering and their bill is the same as mine. Same number of dvrs except a little newer.i am getting tired ofhe message service telling me hey free starz, showtimetime etc, when i am paying for it already in my premier package. If they are going to give away free service they should pop up with a auto discount for the subscrbers that are paying during the free service i have had directv for a while now and it has been relativly good , butball my boxes are getting old, and with the new technology out there , *it isnt really worth paying 200 a month for tv service *anymore. Really, is there actually anything being broadcast now, that youre looking foward to watching. Thats the boat i'm in and is starting to take on water.


My spell-checker almost blew up reviewing that post. :eek2:

I don't think most folks would disagree that overall Pay-TV subscription costs are getting quite high, and that in some cases they've passed the tipping point of people retaining their current levels of service.

Promotional discounts (all of which are temporary and attempts to get some of those folks keeping those additional services/channels) are offered by the content providers and then passed on via services like DirecTV...it costs them virtually nothing to pass those promotional discounts on to their customers.

Then again, people can get plenty of HDTV for much less than $200 a month.


----------



## Lazy Senior (Jan 24, 2005)

MysteryMan said:


> Then why don't you do that? :sure:


When my DTV contract expires I WILL churn elsewhere. I go where the price is the lowest for the least TV service I (or my wife) can tolerate. I have done this many times in the past. I will continue to spend my TV service $$ where I get the most value.

After reading all the posts here defending DTV and their yearly price increases I can understand why DTV has no incentive to keep prices from going up. :lol:


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Lazy Senior said:


> When my DTV contract expires I WILL churn elsewhere. I go where the price is the lowest for the least TV service I (or my wife) can tolerate. I have done this many times in the past. I will continue to spend my TV service $$ where I get the most value.
> 
> After reading all the posts here defending DTV and their yearly price increases I can understand why DTV has no incentive to keep prices from going up. :lol:


I haven't met too many folks that welcome paying higher prices for anything.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with making your own choices as to which service to get your TV content, or even if you chose to get over-the-air "free" TV (while it lasts).

But the reality is that ALL pay-TV service providers have to pay for (higher-cost) content of various channels, so the issue is common to ALL of them. Dish, ComCast, TWC, COX, and even FIOS raised their prices impacting 2013 rates.

Going back to the original premise of this thread in the original post...it may pay for a short time to complain about a specific part of monthly fees, but unfortunately in the long run...you'll have to pay the piper no matter where you get your TV service.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Depending on what package you get, after both D* and E*'s upcoming increases, you may not see as much benefit to switching. And with E*'s upcoming increases, there is some confusion about the existing or new during certain time periods getting discounts.

I have Premier and 3 HDDVRs, and with the discounts D* seems to give out for keeping that package, I'll be paying something around the $120 price point. Switching to E* with AEP+Sports pack wouldn't be much different than that even during the 1st year if I were to switch.


----------



## HinterXGames (Dec 20, 2012)

dudester said:


> If direct is loosing so much money by giving the op a discount since its the providers they have to pay, why are they so quick to give the discount? If my business would lose money by providing the dicount i would have let the op cancel. I have the premier nad am grandfathered on a few things however, i also know some people that have the same package and do not have he grandfathering and their bill is the same as mine. Same number of dvrs except a little newer.i am getting tired ofhe message service telling me hey free starz, showtimetime etc, when i am paying for it already in my premier package. If they are going to give away free service they should pop up with a auto discount for the subscrbers that are paying during the free service i have had directv for a while now and it has been relativly good , butball my boxes are getting old, and with the new technology out there , it isnt really worth paying 200 a month for tv service anymore. Really, is there actually anything being broadcast now, that youre looking foward to watching. Thats the boat i'm in and is starting to take on water.


--
In the vein of the thread, yes there is. Empire Boardwalk, Newsroom, Game of Thrones alone on HBO. I also watch Bill Maher and the occasional movie on HBO. 
--
While I understand the DVD theory, and waiting is fine for some (along with possible spoilers at that point while waiting for the release, it's not for me. I don't want my show spoiled or to know what happened. I also want to be able to discuss the show and what happened with my friends who do watch it, again, without being able to have anything spoiled.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

haddock said:


> Not meaning to fan any flames, but I dont think the point was that you could get a series for $18, but rather was to compare the yearly HBO price of $216 ($18 per month for 12 months) to what you might spend that $ on instead.
> 
> Consistent to the OP of this point, you could buy full seasons of 4-6 shows on DVD for the same $ you spend in a year on HBO. If you have to have your HBO for that 1 show (or even 2 or 3) then you are potentially wasting money paying $18 a month for it. If you watch a ton of HBO programming, then perhaps you get you $'s worth from the subscription.
> 
> I like HBO, and feel they have a lot of high end content. However, I'm in that camp that just doesn't consistently get $216 a year of value from it. If I'm lucky, I have time to consistently watch maybe 5 shows total across all networks, so I don't feel I have the time to get enough value from a single network to justify spending extra $ for it. I can spend half that much in a year on select movie rentals/ppv purchases along with Netflix or select DVDs and get more value (perceived by me) than I would if I paid the $ to subscribe to HBO.


If you're only watching 1 show on HBO you only have to have HBO active while that show is airing. You don't have to have HBO all year just to watch Boardwalk Empire, for example.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

Lazy Senior said:


> After reading all the posts here defending DTV and their yearly price increases I can understand why DTV has no incentive to keep prices from going up. :lol:


I don't think anyone is flat out defending DirecTV, at least I'm not. What I'm trying to do, still, is to get you to see that EVERYONE increases prices not just DirecTV.


----------



## SPACEMAKER (Dec 11, 2007)

Chrismon1001;3153220 said:


> I don't have a huge problem with the increase then again I'm also a premier sub so its not going up for me (yet)... But that said I would be happy to continue paying for HBO up to maybe even at 23-25 a month.... I don't find as much value in Cinemax, or Starz so probably around 15-17 max for now on it, and Showtime would sit around 18-20 a month. Maybe this is just me, but I find huge value in these channels for the series, and will compensate them for there great job. I don't even watch movies much on them.... but others in my house do so it's used for that reason also.


Same here. We don't go out much these days and HBO's Sunday shows are something to which we really look forward. And as a boxing fan, I watch HBO's coverage at least once per month. The only premium I really don't watch is Cinemax because they don't offer any decebt original programming.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

RunnerFL said:


> I don't think anyone is flat out defending DirecTV, at least I'm not. What I'm trying to do, still, is to get you to see that EVERYONE increases prices not just DirecTV.


Ditto.


----------



## SPACEMAKER (Dec 11, 2007)

loudo;3153121 said:


> As much as we all hate them, yearly price increases are on any satellite or cable service. It is like Christmas, you know it is going to be a yearly event.


And every year we'll have a thread exactly like this one where people whine and cry and threaten to cancel only to end up keeping what they have and doing it all again next year.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

SPACEMAKER said:


> And every year we'll have a thread exactly like this one where people whine and cry and threaten to cancel only to end up keeping what they have and doing it all again next year.


----------



## SPACEMAKER (Dec 11, 2007)

RunnerFL;3153290 said:


> I don't think anyone is flat out defending DirecTV, at least I'm not. What I'm trying to do, still, is to get you to see that EVERYONE increases prices not just DirecTV.


Logic and reason does not work unless the people you are debating with are willing to be logical and reasonable.


----------



## STEVEN-H (Jan 19, 2007)

RunnerFL said:


> Yeah, no kidding!
> 
> I've never in my life heard someone say "Those were so much more expensive when I was your age".


Computers were so much more expensive when I was your age.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

STEVEN-H said:


> Computers were so much more expensive when I was your age.


So were HDTV's, inkjet printers, and a host of other things. 

Tech stuff tends to age well in terms of pricing once it's mass-produced.


----------



## TMan (Oct 31, 2007)

The avenues through which one accesses programming is at risk of becoming too fragmented and piecemeal. I'm concerned about original programming being tied to specific providers. If HBO or Showtime has a show people want, generally people can view it with almost any major provider by subscribing to that channel. I don't want the next Sopranos or Homeland or Game of Thrones to be available only on some streaming service like Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, etc.

For example, I enjoyed Arrested Development. Isn't that series being resurrected soon, but will be available only on Netflix? The fanciest subscription level on DirecTV, Dish, or cable won't help me watch that. I would think people would quickly tire of this multiple vendor-multiple monthly charge situation.

I can see why the _providers_ like this arrangement, as it could potentially draw additional subscribers, but to the customer, the method is much less financially tenable.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

STEVEN-H said:


> Computers were so much more expensive when I was your age.


Computers aren't a service, they are a device. We're talking about services provided.


----------



## jclangston (Oct 19, 2010)

For everyone that is mad about the price increases, think about the companies that you work for. Do you think that your company charges the same rate today as they did five years ago for the same service? Of course not, its called inflation, I'm not defending DirecTv but its part of life. That is why most companies give their employees a small "cost of living" annual raise.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Unfortunately not all do. I know someone that works for a large city (in the top 15). No one in her department has gotten a cost if living increase in at least 4 years. And I believe that has been fairly normal city wide.


----------



## Lazy Senior (Jan 24, 2005)

jclangston said:


> That is why most companies give their employees a *small* "cost of living" annual raise.


The key word here is small. These days you are lucky to be working, forget about any increase in pay. Many hope just to be able to hang onto their present wage, forget about any raise.

Since I am a Lazy Senior, a good portion of my income is Social Security and my stock portfolio.

SSI "cost of living" raise for the next year is *1.7* % which will not come close to covering the milk price increase, gas increase, income tax increase and DTV increase. :lol::lol:

And My stock portfolio - well ask our do-nothing Politicians how the stocks are doing!


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

RunnerFL said:


> That's a device, not a service though.


20 bucks a month for the service. now pay 59.99


----------



## Billzebub (Jan 2, 2007)

Lazy Senior said:


> When my DTV contract expires I WILL churn elsewhere. I go where the price is the lowest for the least TV service I (or my wife) can tolerate. I have done this many times in the past. I will continue to spend my TV service $$ where I get the most value.
> 
> After reading all the posts here defending DTV and their yearly price increases I can understand why DTV has no incentive to keep prices from going up. :lol:


You should feel free to spend your money anyway you see fit.

TV service is not a religion and if changing fits your needs, go for it.

That being said, why are you so comfortable criticizing how others choose to spend their money?


----------



## Billzebub (Jan 2, 2007)

SPACEMAKER said:


> Same here. We don't go out much these days and HBO's Sunday shows are something to which we really look forward. And as a boxing fan, I watch HBO's coverage at least once per month. The only premium I really don't watch is Cinemax because they don't offer any decebt original programming.


I like Strike Back and Hunted. Allso, Banshee looks intriguing.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

Everybody raises their prices, so I go with the best product. DirecTV is the best out there for me.


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

Lazy Senior said:


> When my DTV contract expires I WILL churn elsewhere. I go where the price is the lowest for the least TV service I (or my wife) can tolerate. I have done this many times in the past. I will continue to spend my TV service $$ where I get the most value.
> 
> After reading all the posts here defending DTV and their yearly price increases I can understand why DTV has no incentive to keep prices from going up. :lol:


Well, if settling for less floats your boat......:sure:


----------



## Lazy Senior (Jan 24, 2005)

MysteryMan said:


> Well, if settling for less floats your boat......:sure:


BINGO!!!!!! This is exactly what I want. I want to pay less. Right now I have the Entertainment package. It has *many* channels I never watch. I hate sports and don't want to pay for sports channels. I have NO need for ON Demand and don't want to pay for the cost. I don't need locals (I have an OTA antenna) and don't want to pay for the cost of locals on DTV.

One of the problems is DTV has continually added services (and IMO unwanted channels) over the years - which someone has to pay for. It is one of the reasons DTV costs have gotten so high.

I want a barebones, lowest cost TV service. I want Lifetime, Discovery, CNN, MSNBC, and HBO. That is it. And I want a HD DVR that does not cost $30 a month for the rest of my life.


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

Lazy Senior said:


> BINGO!!!!!! This is exactly what I want. I want to pay less. Right now I have the Entertainment package. It has *many* channels I never watch. I hate sports and don't want to pay for sports channels. I have NO need for ON Demand and don't want to pay for the cost. I don't need locals (I have an OTA antenna) and don't want to pay for the cost of locals on DTV.
> 
> One of the problems is DTV has continually added services (and IMO unwanted channels) over the years - which someone has to pay for. It is one of the reasons DTV costs have gotten so high.
> 
> I want a barebones, lowest cost TV service. I want Lifetime, Discovery, CNN, MSNBC, and HBO. That is it. And I want a HD DVR that does not cost $30 a month for the rest of my life.


Your profile shows both DirecTV and DISH as your DBS providers. No wonder you're tired of paying high costs for TV service. :sure: As for DirecTV adding services and channels, one man's candy can be another man's poison. Obviously DirecTV, DISH, or Cable won't be able to satisfy your "limited" wants for TV service (Lifetime, Discovery, CNN, MSNBC, and HBO, plus a no cost DVR). Good luck finding a service provider who can.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Complaining about rates is so.....so....last year.


----------



## Lazy Senior (Jan 24, 2005)

MysteryMan said:


> Your profile shows both DirecTV and DISH as your DBS providers.


I churn every chance I get, so I can receive the Huge New Customer discounts. At this time I am a DTV customer with "only" 13 months to go before being a "new customer" again. :lol: :lol: :lol:

I churn where the lowest price benefits me. Having churned many many times with Dish, DTV. Mediacom, and Comcast I have absolutely no preference in providers. In other words DTV is no better than anyone else. I go where I can get the lowest price....


----------



## MysteryMan (May 17, 2010)

Lazy Senior said:


> I churn every chance I get, so I can receive the Huge New Customer discounts. At this time I am a DTV customer with "only" 13 months to go before being a "new customer" again. :lol: :lol: :lol:
> 
> I churn where the lowest price benefits me. Having churned many many times with Dish, DTV. Mediacom, and Comcast I have absolutely no preference in providers. In other words DTV is no better than anyone else. I go where I can get the lowest price....


Thanks for the heads up. In 13 months we can look forward to you ranting about your new service provoder. :sure:


----------



## cariera (Oct 27, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Let me know when you find something that's getting cheaper each year - anything - I wanna buy a truckload.


Lets see, in the last five years my mortgage interest rate (house payment) has gone down, the cost of my internet service has decreased, my natural gas rate (cost to heat and cook in my home) has decreased, my water and sewer bills haves stayed exactly the same.

Beep, beep, beep...... Back up that truck.


----------



## loudo (Mar 24, 2005)

cariera said:


> Lets see, in the last five years my mortgage interest rate (house payment) has gone down, the cost of my internet service has decreased, my natural gas rate (cost to heat and cook in my home) has decreased, my water and sewer bills haves stayed exactly the same.
> 
> Beep, beep, beep...... Back up that truck.


Where do you live that the gas rate decreased??


----------



## mnassour (Apr 23, 2002)

FWIW, natural gas has decreased by about half in central Texas over the past 24 months...wish I could say the same for DirecTV!!!


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

mnassour said:


> FWIW, natural gas has decreased by about half in central Texas over the past 24 months...wish I could say the same for DirecTV!!!


Ya - they raised every other place in the US to cover your cut of 50 percent


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

cariera said:


> Lets see, in the last five years my mortgage interest rate (house payment) has gone down, the cost of my internet service has decreased, my natural gas rate (cost to heat and cook in my home) has decreased, my water and sewer bills haves stayed exactly the same.
> 
> Beep, beep, beep...... Back up that truck.


Mortgage - I own my home clear so no worries about that
Natural Gas - 35 percent increase in 2012
Water - 19 percent increase in 2012
Sewer - 75 percent increase in 2012, with request for another increase
Electricity - 25 percent increase in 2012
Trash pickup - 15 percent increase in 2012


----------



## Cyber36 (Mar 20, 2008)

Lazy Senior said:


> I churn every chance I get, so I can receive the Huge New Customer discounts. At this time I am a DTV customer with "only" 13 months to go before being a "new customer" again. :lol: :lol: :lol:
> 
> I churn where the lowest price benefits me. Having churned many many times with Dish, DTV. Mediacom, and Comcast I have absolutely no preference in providers. In other words DTV is no better than anyone else. I go where I can get the lowest price....


I'm gonna become a "churner" myself as of 2/1. This is what I get for 18 years of loyalty & never being late on a bill?? If I were king of *tv, all "loyal" subjects would be intitled to a 3 year price freeze, based on certain criteria. Show me you still want me or I'll show you the door......


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

STEVEN-H said:


> Computers were so much more expensive when I was your age.


Apples to oranges.

That's 'widget' based stuff. The more widgets you make, the cheaper it is to make them.

Much different than creative content, sports rights, etc...or the very costs that drive content (actors, producers, directors, writers, taxes, etc..human talent). They're not widgets. Anything that is linked to entertainment...movies, tv, sports, video games, that requires creativity, unique talents, etc are going to go up in price.

Movie tickets, sports tickets, licensing fees, etc. When Brad Pitt's fees go up, so does the downstream prices. When a new NFL deal is signed with the players or ESPN does a deal for MNF, then prices go up downstream. When PS3 of XBox signs a licensing deal to do some Marvel comics game, prices go up.

They aren't widgets, they aren't manufactured goods. There is also tremendous amount of money that goes into the piloting or creation of shows, series, that are risky and don't pan out. This is what makes it so different than the music industry. The cost to produce a music album is small and it was easy to see how a disruptor like Apple or others could make do what they did to music. It's also easy to see why Apple, Google, Intel, Hulu, etc, etc. are finding it much more difficult to do so with video. It's apples to oranges is such a huge way. So much deeper, more complex, etc.


----------



## Lazy Senior (Jan 24, 2005)

Cyber36 said:


> Show me you still want me or I'll show you the door......


My motto is 'What have you done for me lately?"

It is the reason I change TV providers every couple of years. I love those New Customer discounts which save me 100s of $$$. Loyalty *may* get you a pat on the back and a couple of free movies.. :lol:


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

wingrider01 said:


> Mortgage - I own my home clear so no worries about that
> Natural Gas - 35 percent increase in 2012
> Water - 19 percent increase in 2012
> Sewer - 75 percent increase in 2012, with request for another increase
> ...


And I'll bet the Natural gas you are getting is "gassier" and more natural.

I'll bet the water you got is more wet, and better tasting.

I'll bet the electricity you are now getting is more electrifying.

:lol:


----------



## loudo (Mar 24, 2005)

wingrider01 said:


> Mortgage - I own my home clear so no worries about that
> Natural Gas - 35 percent increase in 2012
> Water - 19 percent increase in 2012
> Sewer - 75 percent increase in 2012, with request for another increase
> ...


Good point, that makes the 3% increase in my DirecTV bill look, "not bad at all".


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

Morgan Stanley reported today that D* prices up about 4.5%. Dish prices up about 5.5%. If cable and Telco do what they normally do, they will be up north of 5%.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Satelliteracer said:


> Morgan Stanley reported today that D* prices up about 4.5%. Dish prices up about 5.5%. If cable and Telco do what they normally do, they will be up north of 5%.


The annual yada-yada-yada....and now obviously the annual yada-yada-yada that follows in these threads.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

For me, the most likely to pass TV tax that Illinois is getting ready to pass (5%) will be a bigger increase than the rate increase that D* is doing. I'm not thrilled with that at all!


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

lparsons21 said:


> For me, the most likely to pass TV tax that Illinois is getting ready to pass (5%) will be a bigger increase than the rate increase that D* is doing. I'm not thrilled with that at all!


Holy Cow! What's the tax based on? Fees you pay? How dare they touch satellite services! No Illinois resources used at all, except 'lectricity. Thiefs! Bastards! Crooks!

[ I wuz borned and raised in the Land of Lincoln....]


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

Satelliteracer said:


> And I'll bet the Natural gas you are getting is "gassier" and more natural.
> 
> I'll bet the water you got is more wet, and better tasting.
> 
> ...


the only gas that is gassier is what the politicians are spewing out both ends

the only water that is spread is from the politicians when they hit their custom designed head that cost $10,000 to buy

the only thing that is more electirfyng is the spewed clap trap from politicians


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

wingrider01 said:


> Ya - they raised *every other place in the US* to cover your cut of 50 percent


Not true. Our natural gas cost in Southern California has gone down a bit in the past year, but nothing like 50%.

Gasoline is something else!


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Laxguy said:


> Holy Cow! What's the tax based on? Fees you pay? How dare they touch satellite services! No Illinois resources used at all, except 'lectricity. Thiefs! Bastards! Crooks!
> 
> [ I wuz borned and raised in the Land of Lincoln....]


Looks like to the total bill. But some research today indicates that it might not pass as the state congress critters are catching a lot of flack about it.


----------



## NR4P (Jan 16, 2007)

OTA is free.
I get 55 OTA channels. Granted not HBO or ESPN but most of us have the option to put up some type of antenna and get a dozen or three dozen stations.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

lparsons21 said:


> Well, you can get them in HD at Apple's iTunes store for about $35/season.


Or you can sit it out for a season and buy the Blu-ray for _considerably_ less and not have to fight with iTunes.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Satelliteracer said:


> That's 'widget' based stuff. The more widgets you make, the cheaper it is to make them.


I dare you to tell me that most of the TLC and Discovery channel stuff isn't widgets TV programming.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Let me know when you find something that's getting cheaper each year - anything - I wanna buy a truckload.


 Most home resale values. :grin:


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

TBlazer07 said:


> Most home resale values. :grin:


That was a temporary trend and not everywhere, mostly because of all the foreclosures and other economic conditions of course.

In fact, they went up last year as much as 6% in 15 major markets.


----------



## dismayed (Dec 24, 2011)

I think it's very telling that competition is increasing dramatically, that there are so many new forms of media, so many new distribution channels, so many new performers vying for a chance, so much new technology that literally has had a transformative effect on the industry, so many possibilities to revamp the process and eliminate entire layers of middlemen as a result, that in some ways TV, at least from an eyeballs ad revenue standpoint, is a pale shadow of what it once was even a decade ago... And yet still prices always go up, no matter what state the economy is in, across the board. 

Other than with necessities (like medical), utilities, and monopolies/cartels, where is that seen? Is TV a necessity? Is it a utility? If its neither then what does that leave us with?

I think media costs go way beyond programming not just being a widget.... One has to ask if the licensing model that is propping the whole system up isn't to blame. While at all other points along the way the innovation has been towards "openness" and increasing freedom, with licensing it seems that with each new law passed more and more rights are taken away from the majority, and specific rights holders have their hands strengthened. When you can't even sing happy birthday to someone and not have to fear, god forbid, that you owe someone a hundred thousand dollars for retransmission of that song, then to me that says something is fundamentally, horribly wrong with the system. That's where our rising costs come from. And I thank DirecTV for taking every opportunity to fight that recently.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

harsh said:


> I dare you to tell me that most of the TLC and Discovery channel stuff isn't widgets TV programming.


I dare to tell you. :lol:

When I was in the manufacturing industry out of college, we created a die and then we ran that machine 18 hours a day cranking out our manufactured product. That is a lot different than scripting, traveling for a show, shooting, editing, marketing, etc, etc. No two shows are a like....all those widgets were alike (within specs anyway).

One has known, fixed costs. The other is variable, even for something like Discovery and TLC. Those are the extremes, anyway.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Satelliteracer said:


> That is a lot different than scripting, traveling for a show, shooting, editing, marketing, etc, etc. No two shows are a like....all those widgets were alike (within specs anyway).


Most of the "reality" programs seem to be widget based. A core group of the same varied personality types put in a situation where they clash for the amusement of the audience. Not quite the high quality scripted show that one might desire.

I would not put Discovery into the category of "widget factory" ... but I only watch the best program(s) on the channel and ignore the reality stuff.

TLC? Tomorrow's programming consists of "My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding" from 6am to Noon, "What Not to Wear" from Noon to 7pm, "Sister Wives" at 7pm and 2am, "Sister Wives: Secrets Revealed" at 8pm and 1am, "Four Weddings" at 9pm and 11pm, another "What Not to Wear" at 10pm and Midnight. Then back to infomercials until morning. The next day is a slightly different variety of reality programming.

Somehow in the push to hundreds of channels we still have the problem of "nothing good on". Yet regardless of provider we pay more to get it - looking for the diamonds among the coal.


----------



## HarleyD (Aug 31, 2006)

And yet some of the "unscripted" shows are so obviously staged that it is sickening.

They may not have a verbatim script but they have pre-arranged situations and participants and outcomes. They are unscripted like the WWE is unscripted.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

No doubt it takes money to create content, distribute it, etc.

However based on ratings...it's very clear there is simply too wide a range of *affordable* content out there to deliver.

What will happen based on supply & demand will be a reduction of some of the lesser channels in terms of availability. It's great to have a wide variety for sure...but when is enough too much in terms of availability?

The viewing public will help decide that.

I anticipate 2013 will separate the men from the boys in overall channel counts and availability.


----------



## jdh8668 (Nov 7, 2007)

RunnerFL said:


> Multiply that $18 by every show you watch...
> 
> Oh, and I challenge you to find an HBO series that costs less than $50 to $60 per season to own on disc.


I have never purchased a season of Entourage for more than $20 at Target. You can always find deals on HBO series all the time too at Amazon.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> The viewing public will help decide that.


Not as long as the carriers as a group continue to support bundling of channels.

I'd much rather the industry take a stand than the gubmint get involved.


----------



## HinterXGames (Dec 20, 2012)

harsh said:


> Not as long as the carriers as a group continue to support bundling of channels.
> 
> I'd much rather the industry take a stand than the gubmint get involved.


While I agree, I don't think the majority of TV watchers do. Networks know this, which is why they have all the power. They know, in the end, people will switch if they aren't getting the channel because of all the choices they have. They know they can cost providers out the yin yang with the mere threat of removing the channel if it's one that is popular. So while good in theory, they can't get together and plan to do it as that would be collusion and against the law I believe.
--
Whereas, providers can't offer alternative solutions for original programming, unless it' in syndication and even then it's not up to date.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

harsh said:


> Not as long as the carriers as a group continue to support bundling of channels.
> 
> I'd much rather the industry take a stand than the gubmint get involved.


Actually...the "gubmint" is already looking at it...in more than one area as well.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

jdh8668 said:


> I have never purchased a season of Entourage for more than $20 at Target. You can always find deals on HBO series all the time too at Amazon.


In my view that is a distorted lens. By the time HBO content hits DVD, it is at the end of it's product lifecycle. Or another way to look at it, the show has earned most of it's money up front from subscribers. Now, if there were less and less subscribers, the cost of that downstream content would be higher or may not exist at all since some of that content may get nixed.

Generally I feel that is one of the mistakes that people make when looking at a la carte. They talk about only the content they want to watch as if it's guaranteed to be a success and will be there.

Think about Walking Dead or Madmen, they can create those types of shows because they are getting guaranteed revenues from many subscribers to bet against. Now, if AMC, etc was only making shows with a la carte subscribers, are those types of shows even considered due to the risk? If they fail, they're toast. My two cents, but I've heard network programmers say this very thing.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

jdh8668 said:


> I have never purchased a season of Entourage for more than $20 at Target. You can always find deals on HBO series all the time too at Amazon.


How many years after it airs?


----------



## Dude111 (Aug 6, 2010)

Lazy Senior said:


> The new HBO price starting in Feb 2013 is increasing $2 a month or $24 over a one year period.
> 
> Does this make any sense for Directv or HBO??


No it doesnt bud.. HBO probably wants MORE $$$$$ (But will they make the quality of programming any better?? -- MOST LIKELY NOT)


----------



## jdh8668 (Nov 7, 2007)

RunnerFL said:


> How many years after it airs?


Within a year or less. Normally you can pick up many of the series cheap the day after Christmas. And if prices keep creeping up on these pay sites, you will see what is happening currently to the movie industry....people start to pirate HBO on torrent sites.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

People *start* to torrent movies when prices increase?? People - some people- have always stolen content and justified it however they wished.

But, yes, as prices increase, some will drop out, some will steal, and others will wait.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

Dude111 said:


> No it doesnt bud.. HBO probably wants MORE $$$$$ (But will they make the quality of programming any better?? -- MOST LIKELY NOT)


You must not subscribe to HBO. They have been constantly improving their channels for quite some time. Better and more series, some boxing and other special event programming and of course, the movies.

And the nice part about it is that I don't have to pay anything at all unless I actually want their channels and shows.

I get a hell of a lot more irritated with the increases caused by those drek channels that are included in nearly all subscription packages. You know those channels that are ever increasing their 'reality' show crap instead of actually doing some quality programming.


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

lparsons21 said:


> And the nice part about it is that I don't have to pay anything at all unless I actually want their channels and shows.
> 
> I get a hell of a lot more irritated with the increases caused by those drek channels that are included in nearly all subscription packages. You know those channels that are ever increasing their 'reality' show crap instead of actually doing some quality programming.


I agree. I'd like to see ESPN channels as a premium add-on rather than provided to all subscribers. I'd subscribe for the college football season. Not much chance of that happening, though.


----------



## HinterXGames (Dec 20, 2012)

Dude111 said:


> No it doesnt bud.. HBO probably wants MORE $$$$$ (But will they make the quality of programming any better?? -- MOST LIKELY NOT)


Odd, i've found HBO to have the highest qualify of programming between the 4 premiums. :grin:


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Laxguy said:


> People *start* to torrent movies when prices increase?? People - some people- have always stolen content and justified it however they wished.
> 
> But, yes, as prices increase, some will drop out, some will steal, and others will wait.


That pretty much sums up the real world today.


----------



## goinsleeper (May 23, 2012)

Dude111 said:


> No it doesnt bud.. HBO probably wants MORE $$$$$ (But will they make the quality of programming any better?? -- MOST LIKELY NOT)


What about the addition of HBO GO? Outside of their channels they have other avenues to their media now.

The bulk of their cost increase is the actors and actresses in their original series now wanting more and more money for every new season. Without retaining these actors and actresses, their shows die. The rest would trickle from there.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> You must not subscribe to HBO. They have been constantly improving their channels for quite some time. Better and more series, some boxing and other special event programming and of course, the movies.
> 
> And the nice part about it is that I don't have to pay anything at all unless I actually want their channels and shows.
> 
> I get a hell of a lot more irritated with the increases caused by those drek channels that are included in nearly all subscription packages. You know those channels that are ever increasing their 'reality' show crap instead of actually doing some quality programming.


 For Boardwalk Empire, I will gladly pay up to maybe $25 per month. I want HBO on Roku though.


----------



## loudo (Mar 24, 2005)

damondlt said:


> I want HBO on Roku though.


According to their web site, HBO-Go is listed as on the Roku.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

loudo said:


> According to their web site, HBO-Go is listed as on the Roku.


Yep, Unless you are a Directv Subscriber.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

Don't need it with DirecTV's HBO VOD.


----------



## loudo (Mar 24, 2005)

damondlt said:


> Yep, Unless you are a Directv Subscriber.


Are you saying you don't get it because you are a DirecTV subscriber? I have DirecTV and HBO and get HBO-GO on my Revue and my XBox 360.


----------



## HinterXGames (Dec 20, 2012)

Hoosier205 said:


> Don't need it with DirecTV's HBO VOD.


It's nice for me because my TV also serves as my computer monitor.


----------

