# Suit Seeks "A La Carte" Channel Choices



## NorfolkBruh (Jun 9, 2007)

*Suit Seeks "A La Carte" Channel Choices*
Sep 20, 6:02 PM (ET)

By ALEX VEIGA



> LOS ANGELES (AP) - The U.S. pay-TV industry amounts to a cartel because it maintains profits by offering channels in prepackaged tiers rather than "a la carte," according to a lawsuit filed Thursday in Los Angeles.
> 
> The federal lawsuit names every major cable and satellite television system operator as well as every major cable and broadcast television network...
> 
> http://apnews.myway.com//article/20070920/D8RPESVG0.html


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

Great.... let's help feed some more lawyers.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I would be saddened if any of my money was spent on this lawsuit.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Stuart, the only good news is that only a little of your money was spent on this. And a little of mine, and his, and hers, etc.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

A few million here, a few million there and pretty soon you're talking some serious money.


----------



## PeaceOfMind (Sep 14, 2006)

If you want to buy 2 of our apples, you must also purchase our package of 3 dozen oranges ....or....buy from our competition but please note that their deal is the same and, no, as a group of providers, we are not a monoply, for we are all seperate businesses that sell packages and businesses all over the world are doing this....some features in your car, you have never used but you still purchased the car(the package), but in a perfect world, you could purchase only the TV channels that you wanted to watch and pay for a car that had only features that you wanted and perhaps, in that day and age, there would be no more War and people would begin to really try to help each other, instead of basing their help on how much you are willing to pay...but until that day comes, I'm saving my nickels and pennies to pay for my D* package, because I always have an option to leave the $155.00, a month package, and go back to the Free Over The Air High Def channels.


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

All I want is the local channels, classic movies, and edutainment packages. Yet, I have to purchase the music pack and the $port$ pack.


----------



## tomcrown1 (Jan 16, 2006)

Yah lets go Al Carte---will we see any savings no!! price per channel $10 per month get 10 channels $100 per month(be careful for what you wish for as it may come true)


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

I agree with Tom here. If they go a la carte you won't like what happens on a per channel basis


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

What I've said every time ala carte rears its ugly head.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

I really didn't know where to put this one....
As it effects not only DirecTV and EchoStar..

But pretty much every cable-co, and most of the major content providers...

*Major Cable and Satellite Operators Face Class Antitrust Suit*



> Multichannel News) _ An antitrust lawsuit filed Thursday accuses leading programming, cable and satellite TV firms of colluding to only offer prepackaged tiers of bundled programs and refusing to sell programming a la carte.
> 
> The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California's Western Division, seeks damages and an end to the bundling practices
> .......


Read the rest of the article at: *Multichannel*


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

My problem with a al carte is that not only would it be more expensive, but I would probably miss a lot of programming that I now watch that I never thought I would watch.


----------



## Mixer (Sep 28, 2006)

I am for the ala carte idea but there is one small problem that i see with it for me and my family. There may be that one show that we want to watch on a channel that we do not get so let us say that each chanbel costs 2 or 3 dollars a month we can add that channel so that we can watch that show and pay the charge and then remove it when we are done and only pay for that month. I am thinking however that the provders would require minimum sub times to avoid this kind of practice. 

If we go ala carte then PPV for each show on a channel couldn't be too far behind could it? People will ask well why do I have to pay for ABC when all I really want on there is Lost.


----------



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

Dish Network charges $5 per downgrade/sidegrade. That's an effective way of giving you freedom to change while paying to maintain the CSRs and databases necessary to let you do that.

Dish Network also charges an access fee if you want some of its a la carte programming (such as the Superstations) without a minimum package. I expect that Dish figures that access fee plus the a la carte purchase is enough to pay for the maintenance of that subscriber's account.

Some series episodes are posted as PPV video downloads on iTunes. I'd rather use a good antenna and a DVR.

Which goes back to my main view of a la carte - yaneverknow. Some family-centric groups want reverse a la carte. Some folks point to the Canadian theme bundle model. Some want every single channel separately. The talk about a la carte is still in the concept stage. Until a real government-backed plan starts moving forward, we don't even know what "a la carte" would mean.


----------



## lee635 (Apr 17, 2002)

What seems to be missing from the FUD about ala carte is that it wouldn't stop allowing programming packages. E* and D* could still offer packages, but would also offer ala carte. 

Like when you go to the chinese buffet, but decide to order off the menu anyway.  Or like when you go to Albertsons for some oranges, you can get a 5 lb bag of oranges, or you can buy 2 oranges; groceries have figured out to do this without all the gloom and doom you guys keep alleging. And it's not $8 for a 5 lb bag or $12 per orange.  Can't ala carte and bundled just get along...  

I think the way this would play out is that most folks would buy a package to get a bunch of channels at a bundled price, but they might also add a channel or two to that package. Also, you would see folks buying a package, but asking for such and such channel to be removed, for example due to objectionable content. Finally, you'd see a few "bottom feeders" and anal-retentive types who would say, I want these channels only and no others. It just makes sense to put teh customer in the drivers seat instead of making only bundles that don't always meet the needs of the customer.


----------



## HIPAR (May 15, 2005)

What portion of my monthly payment goes towards:

a) Maintenance/expansion of the technical infrastructure
b) Administration, customer service, installers
c) Profit 
d) Dividends to the stock holders

and finally

e) Royalties for the actual channels

I'm only guessing but item e) might only account for about 15% of the bill. So the provider still needs to collect the other 85% from me regardless of how many channels I'm buying. They will simply adjust the price structure to maintain the revenue required for the cost of business.

Perhaps, if I order 6 to 10 channels ala-cart, I might save a few dollars a month. Maybe over a year, I can buy a case of beer with that money.

--- CHAS


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

> d) Dividends to the stock holders


That's easy. In the history of the companies dividends to the shareholders have been:
Directv: $0.00 per share
Echostar: $1.00 per share.
Charlie's payout that day was in the ballpark of $160,000,000. Mine was just slightly less.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

HIPAR said:


> Perhaps, if I order 6 to 10 channels ala-cart, I might save a few dollars a month. Maybe over a year, I can buy a case of beer with that money.
> 
> --- CHAS


Ah, flashbacks to poorer (pourer) days when my old housemates looked forward to the weekend when they could bring home a case of: http://www.pfeifferbeer.com/ , the cheapest rot gut they could get their hands on. :lol: If only I had known... http://www.breweriana.com/bottles/bottlepfeiffers.html


----------

