# Is cable making a come back?



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Looking over posts here and going to a friends house who has cable it seems competition in the multi-channel video provider industry has been successful. I can’t speak for the rest of the country but here Time Warner has made significant changes over the past few years, adapting new technology and improving system infrastructure to mutate into a new franchise. Time Warner has made a lot of improvements since I left and now I can’ help but think about going back.

Picture quality is good on the digital channels, on par with DirecTV, little less pixilation tough, and has better color saturation then Dish. The analog channels are just as bad as ever tough, but quite a few of the analog channels are duplicated in digital.

My year contract with DirecTV is up and Time Warner Cable is looking better and better, if it were not for the best DVR on the planet sitting in my entertainment center a two dozen feet behind me, I’d probably go back to cable. A co worker of mine has Time Waners top tier with 2 digital boxes, one of them a DVR, Road Runner and pays ~$139 a month including taxes and franchise fees. After my 1 year Road Runner will go up to $45, DirecTV bill is $68 for TC+ w/Locals, HBO, 2 TiVos. Total $113. TW Cable offers every premium channel out there from HBO, SHO and Starz, most if not all of which are in Dolby Digital, plus they have all of Music Choice channels and On Demand is pretty cool. Having a TiVo I cared about on demand but after seeing it in action I was in awe.

I don’t know how it is in other parts of the country but if other systems are this good, how long can DBS continue to be a success. I guess I’m lucky to live in an area with a decent cable company (and I should take advantage of that), if I lived 4 miles east from where I do now, I’d be in Adelphia territory, Adelphia of Buffalo is pitiful at best when it comes to both TV and internet.


----------



## HappyGoLucky (Jan 11, 2004)

As you've noted, the analog channels are still terrible. Here with Comcast, the lower 99 channels are analog with picture quality being horrific. The analog tuners in their DVR box make it even worse as they are obviously the cheapest parts available (the tuner on my TV provides a MUCH better picture than that coming from the DVR on the analog channels). And the HDTV/DVR box they provide (Motorola 6412) is a real piece of junk. I cannot believe they let something this buggy out into the market. I miss my DirecTivo HDVR2!!!!!


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

If and when they ever do ALL of the cable channels in full digital /hd on the networks, then you will see Cable kick satellite's ass. TWC in my are has a hd dual tuner dvr that doesn't cost anything to add and is available for around 9.00 a month. No dvr fee since it is included in the 9.00. I have heard in some places that they will go full digital on all channels in the next 2 years. Combine that with dvr and true video on demand and bundeled prices for high speed internet and cable phone and you would have a killer combination. If and this is the biggest one; if they can keep their prices lower than satellite. None of this cheap for 6 months and then they go up to double the price. 

TWC offers 6 months of high speed road runner internet for 29.95 and then it would go up to 44.99 for those who take at least life line cable which would kick your price up to 60.00 and 57.99 for those who don't have life line cable. THis is where SBC is kicking their ass. I can get dsl with SBC and basic phone and long distance for 60.00 . Not just 6 months but all the time. There is really no difference in the speed of dsl and cable modems. At least I haven't seen any difference. IF I could bundel the Dish sat service and take Cingular cell phone service I could really rack up the discounts on all 4 services. 

But in my area TWC won't add the digital signals of the networks at full hd resolutions. So the local networks won't add their digital signal to the cable system. So satellite is still cheaper and I can get my digital ota channels with my 921 ,soon to be 942 receiver, now rather than 2 years from now.


----------



## Bill R (Dec 20, 2002)

The cable industry (as a whole) is much better than it was 6 or 7 years ago. The reason: competition from DBS. A lot of cable companies lost a lot of customers to DISH and DirecTV because DBS had more channels that customers wanted. The cable companies have made considerable investment to upgrade their systems to provide more reliable service with much more capacity and (most) are now at a point that they can provide as many or more channels than DBS. Most companies have improved their customer service to a point that it is just as good (or better) than what you get from the satellite companies.

The cable companies are getting very aggressive in their pricing (especially for bundled service) and are now offering decent set top boxes (including DVRs). For some cable systems pricing is still a big issue for their "low end" customers. If you want everything, cable _could be_ a better deal but for people that want a smaller package (like DISH's AT60 or DirecTV's Total Choice) satellite is usually cheaper. Around here the cable package that is about equivalent to DISH's AT60 package is about $12 a month more from the cable company. The local cable company does throw in 8 public access, educational access and government access (PEG) channels that are only carried because the local cable franchise requires them to be carried. Because of the pricing it is causing a LOT of "low end" customer to switch to satellite where they get more "desired" channels than they can get from cable. Losing those lower package customers to satellite is a great concern to cable companies (at lease to my local provider) because they know that once they lose them it is very unlikely that they will ever get them back (and will never be able to sell them hi-speed internet, telephone and other services).

HD is becoming a big issue for cable. Just before the baseball world series the two major cable systems in our area (Time Warner and Insight Communications) reached an agreement with all the local stations and now carry every local channel (that is transmitting digital) in HD. They also use that against the satellite companies in their ads. Right now, for most customers, it isn't a big deal but it could be in the future as the customer's desire for HD continues to grow.

It is going to be very interesting to see where the cable/satellite wars go in the next couple of years. Hopefully, it will mean more choices and better service for everyone.


----------



## Scott Greczkowski (Mar 21, 2002)

I agree with what Bill said.

Satellite became successfull because cable companies were sleeping and did not care. They offered 36 channels and were happy to offer you them, Satellite came along offering hundereds of channels and "Digital Quality", people who were sick of not having the cable channels they wanted jumed on the Satellite Bandwaggon.

Then came HDTV, people wanted it and Satellite Delivered (even if it was 3 channels) when you called the cable company asking for HDTV they told you HGTV was carried on channel 27. 

Satellite has woken up cable tv and turned them into a growing monster. Cable Internet rocks and for the most part you never see people having issues with it, Cable Telephone also works great and is half the price of the regular telco. And now cable is picking up the ball and running with HDTV, by starting to offer more HD content then is available on Satellite and including locals also in HD, that is something Satellite can not do now. And another thing cable does that Satellite can not do is real video on demand. Numbers are starting to show that VOD is being used more then even the cable esptimes showed. Who needs 100 channels when you can watch what you want when you want, no timers to set noo hoping your DVR recorded. While VOD is not there yet it soon will be.

Satellite has lots to fear frm Cable, and while cable is just getting started don't expect them to stay quiet for long.


----------



## HappyGoLucky (Jan 11, 2004)

While cable may be a "sleeping giant" waking up, if my experience with Comcast and their dual-tuner HD/DVR box is common (according to posts on DSLReports, my experience is the norm), then cable has a LONG way to go to become even half as good as DirecTV. Perhaps those of you who have fought with the buggy Dish DVRs might find the models from Comcast to be business as usual. But for someone accustomed to the Tivo with DirecTV, this Motorola box is abysmal.

As to prices, I'm now paying MUCH more to get similar channels on cable than I did with DirecTV. I had DirecTV Total Choice w/locals, 2 receivers (one of them a Tivo), and HBO. I paid $60/month. In order to get similar channel lineup and the DVR on Comcast, I now pay $82/month and have crappy local channel picture quality and a DVR that sux. Thankfully, I'm getting cable internet for $19.95/month for 6 months but after that it jumps to $42/month.


----------



## cdru (Dec 4, 2003)

Cable is making a come back. But I still see three sticking points that prevent them from returning to what they once were:

1. Digital cable is still too expensive. For people who only care about the AT60-type packages, digital cable costs too much. I don't care about 200 CD-quality music channels or 20 PI channels. I just want the few major networks, you know, the ones that are on analog, just in digital. If you would provide me with an AT60 package for $20 regular price, I'd be happy and would consider switching back. But as it is now, you'd charge me a minimum of $47 for analog, and $57 for digital basic. No thanks. That's $16+ more then I want to spend. You also don't even offer a DVR in my area.

2. Your HSI rates are too high as well. $57 for your HSI? No thanks. I can get a DSL line for almost 1/2 that with Verizon. Yeah it's a little slower, but at $57 (or even $42 if I was a subscriber), your still not competitive.

3. FTTP/FIOS is knocking on your door. With your hybrid network, yes you have some room to grow. But not nearly as much as what the telcos are going to have. If you don't watch out, they are going to sneak up behind you and run you over. They already have an HSI-killer with 3x the speed for about the same price. From the looks in other towns, they are going to be very competitive with both you and the satellite providers.


----------



## Mike Richardson (Jun 12, 2003)

Bundling is not all that great. Usually you can get things cheaper without bundling if you just shop around. For example buying separately in Houston:

(all of this is non promotional pricing)

Get DSL for $27 per month from SBC. Get your land line phone from them too $23 or so.
Go to Primus Long Distance, it's like $2/mo and some low rate like 5¢ per minute. Talk 250 mins and you pay $14.50.
Get the DISH DHA plan and get AT180 + locals AND GET EVERY CHANNEL ON 3 TVs for $58.

So if you talk 250 mins per month you pay total $122.50 for TV, Phone Local , Long Distance, Internet

Now lets "bundle" all this on cable:
Digital Phone. $40/mo, this includes a $5 discount because you got internet & video.
Roadrunner $40/mo includes $10 discount for having digital cable.
Cable TV. Digital value is $45. 3 digital boxes $21. Add the Movies Plus for $3 because DISH has these channels. Technically you should order DigiPIC 1000 for $55 and get it with The Movie Channel because DISH gives you TMC with your AT180. Technically you should get the Sports Pack for $3 because it has some channels DISH has, but then you get extra channels that DISH doesn't have so I'll omit it.

Total $149. ($159 if you add TMC. $162 if you add Sports)

now I'll be fair and say that TMC gives you unlimited phone service with their digital phone, however if you dont talk much like then paying $40 for this is a waste.

You can cut 2 digital boxes and get it to $135 - still more expensive - but that is totally unfair. The other TVs get crap analog. You can get CableCard which I THINK is $2 per TV so if you're lucky enough to have all cable card TVs you can pay $134/mo but you get NO PPV and NO GUIDE and NO ONDEMAND.

You can get it even cheaper another way:
$42/mo earthlink cable modem
VONAGE VOIP $15/mo for the 500 mins plan works thru cable modem
DISH AT180 3 tvs locals DHA $58

total $115

or $125 for vonage unlimited.

In conclusion Cable's standard nonpromotional rates are not very good at least in Houston. If I were on a budget I would go the vonage route. Some people cut their land phone alltogether and just have a cell phone but the cost per minute on those are usually high and the audio quality is usually not too good.


----------



## Jacob S (Apr 14, 2002)

People look at what they get for their money, or the price for what they are getting, or both. This is where satellite comes ahead in some areas.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

_"Is cable making a comeback?"_

I would say yes, but only with certain cablecos in selected locations. IMO, the overall trend is toward improvement.


----------



## Ray_Clum (Apr 22, 2002)

Right now, I've got TC+ w/locals, a DTiVo and a 2nd standard receiver. Monthly bill is 56.15, will go up to 59.18 with March increase.

I also have SBC's All Distance package and DSL service ($82.22 including taxes)

I'm in Comcast's service area in Indianapolis:

Comcast Digital Voice $39.95
Comcast HSI 42.95
Comcast DVR 9.95
Digital Silver 79.99
2nd digital box 6.00

Comcast Total 178.84 (not including taxes)

My current payment
DirecTV $59.18
DTV premium 12.60 (added since Comcast's site doesn't have a Digital Cable less premiums)
SBC 82.22

My total $154.00 (including taxes)


Personally, I can't see spending $24/month more for crappy analog cable and a non-TiVo DVR...


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

> 2. Your HSI rates are too high as well. $57 for your HSI? No thanks. I can get a DSL line for almost 1/2 that with Verizon. Yeah it's a little slower, but at $57 (or even $42 if I was a subscriber), your still not competitive


Here Road Runner from Time Warner is $44.95 if you don't have any cable TV service or $39.95 if you have cable TV. For a while there was an on going promotion 6 months for $29.95 and later was extended to 1 year. There is no modem lease BS and I didn't have to buy a modem, but if I were to cancel it would have to be returned to Time Warner. No install or set up fee either and they even ran all new lines. Since Road Runner became available here it has actually had a price decrease of $5, while getting a speed increase from 3MB/s down to 5MB/s.

On the other hand, Adelphia here is $58 without cable or $46 with cable TV, subtract $3 if you chose to buy the modem instead of lease. There is also a $25 install fee and speed is 3 MBPS.

For the past week I've been having some issues with sporadic outages, nothing major mostly overnights or afternoons. But they came out today and replaced a connection up on the pole and I received a month credit for the trouble with out even making a fuss over it. The CSRs on the phone were what I like, direct. Less then 3 minutes hold time, all the CSR had me do was unplug and replug in the modem, Cable LED remained off a few seconds later a service appointment was set up.

If TiVo can get a deal going with Comcast, as mentioned in another thread, then eventually work with Time Warner, I'll be gone. I like DirecTV very much and have had no issues with them, but TW of Rochester seems to have their head on straight and offers me more. They are a reincarnated service from what they used to be and apples to apples in my situation, they'd probably be the same price or a little more, while I'm getting a hell of a lot more channels.

Tomorrow night at work during break for laughs I'm going to call up TW and request pricing and package info, their website is pretty bleak on this. After inspecting the line up further, 58 out of the 74 channels in the analog line up are also in digital. The 16 exceptions include our locals, community access channels, ShopNBC, QVC, C-SPAN2, The TV Guide Channel and The Rochester Channel.

Excluding all the OOM RSNs, west cost feeds, shopping and public interest channels the only channels on the DirecTV system TW doesn't offer are NFL Network, Boomerang, TV Games, ESPN U, TV One, Gol TV & Galavision.


----------



## DS0816 (Mar 29, 2002)

Steve Mehs said:


> Looking over posts here and going to a friends house who has cable it seems competition in the multi-channel video provider industry has been successful. I can't speak for the rest of the country but here Time Warner has made significant changes over the past few years, adapting new technology and improving system infrastructure to mutate into a new franchise. Time Warner has made a lot of improvements since I left and now I can' help but think about going back.
> 
> Picture quality is good on the digital channels, on par with DirecTV, little less pixilation tough, and has better color saturation then Dish. The analog channels are just as bad as ever tough, but quite a few of the analog channels are duplicated in digital.
> 
> ...


Bless you.

You really hit the nail on the head.

How much longer can DBS tell us about upcoming technological improvements, and not be bringing in more standard-definition channels?


----------



## SPECIES11703 (Oct 10, 2004)

HappyGoLucky said:


> As you've noted, the analog channels are still terrible. Here with Comcast, the lower 99 channels are analog with picture quality being horrific. The analog tuners in their DVR box make it even worse as they are obviously the cheapest parts available (the tuner on my TV provides a MUCH better picture than that coming from the DVR on the analog channels). And the HDTV/DVR box they provide (Motorola 6412) is a real piece of junk. I cannot believe they let something this buggy out into the market. I miss my DirecTivo HDVR2!!!!!


 You are absolutely right about Comcast! I have DirecTV and I gave Comcast a try to see how good they claim to be. I had both recievers hooked up to my TV and noticed how BAD the reception for my local channels on comcast were. I would say I would get a better picture with my 30+ year old rooftop antennae than with comcast. The DVR from comcast only recorded 35 hours. The Digital picture from Comcast that I saw was better than Directv. Colors and brightness were higher . I cancelled Comcast after 2 months. Directv still rules. I just love having my locals in clear crystal quality here in Los Angeles.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Once cable companies get rid of all their analog channels, which is what most folks complain about, IMHO you'll see more folks dumping the dish for cable, especially when more folks get HDTV sets in their homes. Doing this means that folks don't need to install an OTA antenna to get their locals in HD. Yes, D* has announced LIL HD but unless they provide a full rate signal vs the HD-Lite they've been delivering people won't be happy with their quality. E* hasn't announced what they're going to do (I don't think Charlie knows what he's going to do yet). 

The current DVR that Comcast/Motorola is deploying does have a smaller HDD then the DBS companies but it was one advantage over the DBS companies, it has a firewire port that IS active and you can offload content to a D-VHS deck. It also has another big advantage, price, $10/month vs. hundreds ($250 up to $1K) purchase price then additional lease or PVR or mirrored box fees in addition to the purchase. 

Rupert and Charlie need to watch out else they'll become the cable companies of the 21st century.


----------



## Bill R (Dec 20, 2002)

RAD said:


> Once cable companies get rid of all their analog channels, which is what most folks complain about, IMHO you'll see more folks dumping the dish for cable, especially when more folks get HDTV sets in their homes.


Right now it is an FCC requirement that the cable companies carry the basic tier (which MUST include the local channels) so that no cable box is required (tunable via a TV set's analog tuner). Yes, there could be a rule change but it VERY likely won't happen until all OTA stations are digital and stop transmitting in analog. That is something that likely won't happen for at least 5 years (maybe more).

One of the local cable companies did start moving a lot of analog channels to digital and, for them, it was a (revenue) disaster. They thought by moving channels that they would migrate many customers to digital service. Instead many customers saw it as a hidden rate increase, they got fewer analog channels and if they moved to digital service there was a price increase PLUS they required a cable box (at $7.99 a month) for each TV that they had cable on in order to get the same channels that they had before. Many people have analog service on quite a few TVs and don't like the idea of paying for a cable box on each TV.

After losing hundreds of customers in a matter of weeks the cable company did see the error of their ways and moved some of the channels back to analog. They now have a lot of channels (including all locals) that are both in analog and digital and have "backed off" from moving the current analog tier channels to digital. They had originally said that all channels beyond the basic tier (which is 26 channels) would be digital by 2006.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Thanks for that update. Then they could keep the 10 to 20 local channels in analog and make the other 70 to 80 as digital, even mirroring the locals in digital, to get around that rule and free up a ton of bandwidth for other services. From what you said, nothing says that The Weather Channel or TNT needs to be kept in analog, just your local channels which is the minority of the channels in question.


----------



## Bill R (Dec 20, 2002)

RAD said:


> From what you said, nothing says that The Weather Channel or TNT needs to be kept in analog, just your local channels which is the minority of the channels in question.


Yes, that is correct. In fact , our local cable company carries the Weather Channel (and the local RADAR channel too) on their highest analog tier. At one time they carried TWC on channel 3 (in the basic package) but moved it so people would have to subscribe to the higher package in order to get it. For most "regular" cable channels (TNT, CNN, and most of the other "big" names) the contract that the cable company has with the vendor specifies what tier the channel will be in (the same is true for DISH and DirecTV) and if the channel can be carried in both analog and digital. I know our local cable company can't even move a local channel (within the basic tier) to a different channel number without approval of the owners of that station. Contracts determine a lot of what cable (and DBS companies) can or can not do.


----------



## lazaruspup (Mar 18, 2005)

Ray_Clum said:


> I'm in Comcast's service area in Indianapolis:
> 
> Comcast Digital Voice $39.95
> Comcast HSI 42.95
> ...


Respecting your totals, but somewhat fuzzy math. It should look like this.

Comcast

Comcast Digital Phone - $39.95
DVR Box Rental - $9.95(Includes DVR and HD Pak)
Comcast OnDemand Silver Plus w/HBO-SHO - $79.95
HSI - $42.95
2nd Box - $6.00

Total - $178.84(before taxes)

DirecTV

Total Choice Plus w/HBO-SHO - $68.99
DVR Fee - $4.99
HD Package - $10.99
2nd Receiver Fee - $4.99
SBC Package - $82.22
12 Payments of $70.75(to cover cost of HDTivo) - $849.00

Total - $242.93(before taxes)
(Without HDTivo Figured into the equation... $172.18)

Obviously a little closer without the Tivo figured in for the first year, you can expect to pay just six dollars less the second year. If you were to subtract the HD from the Comcast two packages, you would not affect the cable package but it would drop the D* package by $10.99. I like to have the most bang for my buck though.


----------



## News Junky (Mar 16, 2005)

Great question. I think so. At least for me the main draw of satellite was the technical feasability of being able to get everything cable offered plus TV channels from other cities and even other countries. However efforts to artficially restrict satellite channel availabilty have been successful often with the willing cooperation of some satellite industry players making satellite more like cable in terms of the natural limitations. As a result there is no longer very much difference between cable and satellite in terms of what they offer. Under the current restriction laden status satellite's biggest opportunity is serving people in the far reaches of rural America where the cable infustructure simple isn't available. 

Satellite could have revolutionized TV in America by opening up electronic media coiast to coast in amazinig ways such as being able to watch television in one city while physically localed on the other side of the country. Instead its like having the Internet but you can only see local hometown websites or national sites that have been approved for national viewing under strict standards of approval and government oversight, just like communist China does. In light of this cable might be a better choice because they often bundle other services phone service and high spreed Internet that is faster than that of satellite and much less expensive. For people served by a decent cable operator in a medium or larger city, the only real benifit to satellite might be the nice looking grey dish to accent the roof of your home. I guess everybody will have to weigh the pros and cons for themselves. For people living in the middle of nowhere, satellite wins hands down. For everyone else in light of the restrictions, cable has satellite beat IMHO.


----------



## Ray_Clum (Apr 22, 2002)

lazaruspup said:


> Respecting your totals, but somewhat fuzzy math. It should look like this.
> 
> Comcast
> 
> ...


Actually, the DVR is also their HD box, I probably mis-stated that it included the HD package... I don't have an HD unit, so wouldn't get the pack.

So the 12 payments of $70.75 would have actually be 12 payments of $8.25 to cover the $99 SD DTiVo...


----------



## SD4Life (Mar 1, 2005)

I wish I had that problem in my town. The price of basic cable usually will go up a couple of dollars every few months. Right now we pay $49 a month for basic cable, which is about 60-65 channels. In a town 20 miles away, they have the same company and the same channels and they pay only $26 a month. If you want to get cable internet thru them, then you have to get digital cable, which is about 2x as much as basic cable.

I don't think I would ever switch to MediaCom Cable even if they drop their prices dramtically. They have screwed me for too long and I am pretty happy with E*. 

I would have to say that I would honestly prefer to have cable. It's easier and I can have it in as many rooms as I want, but I will never give MediaCom a dime of my money. I will pay E* or D* twice as much cable before I switch to cable.

And if anybody cares, there have been a lot more satellites popping up around town.


----------



## scooper (Apr 22, 2002)

As in most things "cable TV " related - this discussion depends on YOUR location / circumstances.

When I first got E* back in 2000, (or maybe a bit earlier), our little 36 channel analog cable company had just gotten bought by TimeWarner. Picture wasn't great (especially on the higher channels), and channel selection just sucked. Getting E* AT100 package was like a breath of fresh air, we kept lifeline cable because I hadn't gotten a good picture OTA yet (yes, we're supposedly Grade A - but I live in a forest. UHF was tough.) About 6months / year later, TWC FINALLY got around to upgrading our area's cable plant to support digital cable / cable modem service - Sprint started offering DSL about 6 months before this. This was also when E* started offering Raleigh's Big 4 networks - combined with Superstations and the National PBS feed - life was good for TV for us. Then Shiva's Must Carry started - got ALL the locals via DBS - even better. I also got the OTA situation figured out. Now - if some disaster happened for E* and I couldn't get locals on DBS - no problem - I get a BETTER analog picture than E* offers AND at least equal to TWC's - I just wouldn't be able to PVR the locals.

Pricewise - I'd say here it's pretty much a wash - for what we watch, everybody runs about the same cost-wise (E* I think still offers more for slightly less). I haven't seen the analog cable offering in quite a while, but getting digital cable / TWC's DVR would cost us more than the E* equivalent.


----------

