There is an interesting article in today's news reports. It deals with the high loss of subscribers to cable services. I am being generic when using the word cable as I am including every source except antenna.
When one reads the article through one suddenly discovers that the content suppliers are controlling how the retailers are packaging what they offer. In their bid to maintain high profits they are forcing the retailer to charge more than is actually necessary based on what the consumer watches. I should think that eventually the situation will reach the point whereat the retailer will be forced to charge so much that even the wealthy will walk away.
The other day I was surfiing to see what was showing on several channels. I found 2 stations showing the same movie. The only difference was that one channel had started showing it maybe a half hour earlier than the other channel. Further, and equally to the point, it is obvious that a group of channels owned by the same company shows a limited number of movies in a cycle over 3 months then changes the movies. Why do I need such "diversity"? Very simple, the content supplier has created a situation whereby I pay for more than I can use and that drives up their profits.
My suspicion is that the content suppliers have so many channels so that they can force this situation so that they can maximise their profits. I also think that the local stations have done the same thing for the same reason. Maybe those local additional stations may be the national network's idea, especially when one can tune into one of them & watch reruns of nationally broadcast shows.
How to get around this situation is an interesting question. The article noted what some internet/computer savvy people are doing. Still, to access anything via the internet one must buy into an ISP; no freebees. Pipeddream: if enough people left the cable companies completely then maybe the content supplier would be agreeable to a-la-cart. Oh, well.
Best.
