« As granny often said, "People in the desert want ice water." | Main | “Stoner Road Trip” »
January 14, 2014
Satellite bills can easily breach the $100 a month figure, or easily more than $1,200 a year
A ninety percentage penetration ratemeans there is not going to be any growth in subscribing. Indeed the only way forward is down. Fewer subscribers, fewer viewers. And a yearly cost of $1,200 or more makes cutting cable or satellite attractive. Even for those with jobs, downward pressure on wages and upward pressure on necessities (courtesy of QE forever, thanks Mr. Fed!) will inexorably cause people to dump cable. The Return of Mass Media? | whiskeysplace
Posted by gerardvanderleun at January 14, 2014 12:15 PM. This is an entry on the sideblog of American Digest: Check it out.
Your Say
What is this tele-vision you speak of?
"Got ninety channels of $#!+ on the tv to choose from."
- Paraphrased from "Nobody Home" - Pink Floyd
Posted by: Potsie at January 14, 2014 2:00 PM
Beavis and Butthead said it best in the 90's "600 channels available, wouldnt it be great if just one didn't suck ".
Posted by: Milo Mindbender at January 14, 2014 4:48 PM
We finally let that $1200 yearly expense expire a year ago but it took 2 years to do it. My wife called to cancel and they gave her all the premium channels free, HD free, and a couple other things. So instead of our original 400 channels of bullshit we started getting 600 channels of bullshit. Now we get old TV westerns from the 50's and 60's on DVD from Netflix and the library. Just finished all 4 years of the Fugitive a couple weeks ago. whoa
Posted by: ghostsniper at January 14, 2014 6:36 PM
His conclusions are off base, but the analysis is good. The solution for consumers is to bust up the packaging, so that people can select what they want from a menu. For me that would consist of like 8 channels and the On Demand menu, plus Netflix.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at January 15, 2014 11:20 AM