Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 64
  1. #46
    Quick
    Guest

    Re: Verizon Breaks with Industry, and to begins Pro-rating Termination Fee

    SMS wrote:
    > DecaturTxCowboy wrote:
    >> John Navas wrote:
    >>> Consumers in the
    >>> USA have all benefitted immensely from deregulation.

    >>
    >> Rubbish

    >
    > Actually, there are some areas of deregulation where some
    > consumers have benefited, while some have been hurt, and
    > some where all consumers have been hurt.
    >
    > Take airline deregulation, for example. Consumers living
    > near a major hub have benefited from lower fares, and
    > more flights. Consumers living near smaller cities have
    > often lost all jet service, and must either take a small
    > plane to the hub, or drive to a hub.
    > Bank deregulation cost consumers a lot of money in the
    > bailout of the S&L, and in lower interest rates paid out
    > on savings, though some consumers benefited initially
    > from the very high interest rates paid out on CDs by the
    > S&Ls that were going to become insolvent.


    Bad examples I think. You're talking about subsidizing
    people for making a (possibly poor) choice. I'm not for
    or against regulation. I think it has it's place. I'd error
    on the side of less than more.

    -Quick





    See More: Verizon Breaks with Industry, and to begins Pro-rating Termination Fee




  2. #47
    DecaturTxCowboy
    Guest

    Re: Verizon Breaks with Industry, and to begins Pro-rating TerminationFee

    John Navas wrote:
    > On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 13:03:50 GMT, DecaturTxCowboy <[email protected]> wrote in
    > <[email protected]>:
    >
    >> John Navas wrote:
    >>> Consumers in the
    >>> USA have all benefitted immensely from deregulation.

    >> Rubbish


    *ALL* is rubbish....don't change the topic.



  3. #48
    Larry
    Guest

    Re: Verizon Breaks with Industry, and to begins Pro-rating Termination Fee

    "EOO" <whereeverforever.com> wrote in
    news[email protected]:

    > You don't have Comcast for as a cable provider, do you?
    >
    >
    >


    Ha ha....I almost spit up my beer. Too funny, thanks.




  4. #49
    SMS
    Guest

    Re: Verizon Breaks with Industry, and to begins Pro-rating TerminationFee

    EOO wrote:
    > "John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news[email protected]...
    >> On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 13:03:50 GMT, DecaturTxCowboy <[email protected]> wrote in
    >> <[email protected]>:
    >>
    >>> John Navas wrote:
    >>>> Consumers in the
    >>>> USA have all benefitted immensely from deregulation.
    >>> Rubbish

    >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    >> Senate Rpt.104-023 - TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPETITION
    >>
    >> Deregulation has a clear and consistent track record. In virtually
    >> every case, consumers have benefited from lower prices, better
    >> services and increased choices.

    >
    > You don't have Comcast for as a cable provider, do you?


    Cable TV prices have clearly not benefited from deregulation, though the
    cable industry will claim that the price per channel has decreased.
    Sure, if you want to watch 35 different shopping channels, and 10
    different religious channels.

    OTOH, deregulation of the cable TV industry, and the resultant
    skyrocketing prices, did spawn the satellite TV industry.

    You can read about the failure of the deregulation of the cable industry
    at "http://uspirg.org/uspirg.asp?id2=10531&id3=USPIRG"

    "Since enactment of the 1996 Act that deregulated cable rates, consumer
    cable prices have been rising at three times the rate of inflation and
    even faster for basic and expanded basic service, which is the choice of
    the overwhelming majority of cable subscribers."

    Of course the senate report is written by the same people that took the
    campaign contributions from the industries they were deregulating.



  5. #50
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: Verizon Breaks with Industry, and to begins Pro-rating Termination Fee

    In alt.cellular.cingular SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > Cable TV prices have clearly not benefited from deregulation, though the
    > cable industry will claim that the price per channel has decreased.
    > Sure, if you want to watch 35 different shopping channels, and 10
    > different religious channels.
    >


    In general, prices have gone up because of programmers and not so much because
    of cable or satellite operators. The differences in price between Comcast,
    Dish Network and DirecTV are due to the operators, but the price is
    universally high due to the programmers. The main reason that I see is that
    they force channel bundling by tier. Basic tier ALWAYS has ESPN and ESPN is
    ALWAYS expensive ... so your basic tier package is boosted in price by that
    alone. What makes it quite "unfair" in my opinion is that these programmers
    not only charge operators for distribution [shouldn't it be the other way
    around?], but they also charge for advertisements. The operators are in a
    win/win situation and even the most unwatched channel lives on another day.

    > "Since enactment of the 1996 Act that deregulated cable rates, consumer
    > cable prices have been rising at three times the rate of inflation and
    > even faster for basic and expanded basic service, which is the choice of
    > the overwhelming majority of cable subscribers."


    Indeed, the prices have risen, almost exclusively due to the increase in
    programming costs. Infrastructure is a significant cost [especially
    modernization], but is rather minute compared to programming.


    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1




  6. #51
    SMS
    Guest

    Re: Verizon Breaks with Industry, and to begins Pro-rating TerminationFee

    Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
    > In alt.cellular.cingular SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> Cable TV prices have clearly not benefited from deregulation, though the
    >> cable industry will claim that the price per channel has decreased.
    >> Sure, if you want to watch 35 different shopping channels, and 10
    >> different religious channels.
    >>

    >
    > In general, prices have gone up because of programmers and not so much because
    > of cable or satellite operators. The differences in price between Comcast,
    > Dish Network and DirecTV are due to the operators, but the price is
    > universally high due to the programmers.


    That's what they always claim. What they don't tell you is who owns many
    of the channels that are increasing in price.



  7. #52
    ll
    Guest

    Re: Verizon Breaks with Industry, and to begins Pro-ratingTerminationFee

    SMS wrote:
    > Sure, if you want to watch 35 different shopping channels
    > and 10 different religious channels.


    You forgot the 8 Spanish language channels.
    Grandma doesn't speak Spanish.

    But the cable companies still tout "100 channels!".
    With large yearly fee increases.
    Way above cost of living increases.



  8. #53
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: Verizon Breaks with Industry, and to begins Pro-rating Termination Fee

    In alt.cellular.cingular SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > That's what they always claim. What they don't tell you is who owns many
    > of the channels that are increasing in price.


    You mean like Rupert Murdoch owning both FOX and DirecTV via News Corporation?
    I am no idiot ... I bought stock ;-)

    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1




  9. #54
    EOO
    Guest

    Re: Verizon Breaks with Industry, and to begins Pro-rating Termination Fee


    "Larry" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > "EOO" <whereeverforever.com> wrote in
    > news[email protected]:
    >
    >> You don't have Comcast for as a cable provider, do you?
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Ha ha....I almost spit up my beer. Too funny, thanks.
    >

    It would be funny if I had a choice. The TV part is of no importance to me.
    The
    wife watches it 8 to 16 hours a week.

    We had Dish Network at one time. The picture and sound quality was better
    and the
    they raised their rates about in line with inflation or less.

    My only option for high speed internet access is cable. The neighborhood
    was
    wired "pair-gain" which does not allow for DSL.

    Comcast knows this and gives you an incentive to bundle. At one point it
    was
    cheaper to have internet access and basic TV programming than cable alone.

    Their rate increases are legendary. It's COMCRAPTIC!!!!





  10. #55
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: Verizon Breaks with Industry, and to begins Pro-rating Termination Fee

    In alt.cellular.t-mobile Cyrus Afzali <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>That's what they always claim. What they don't tell you is who owns many
    >>of the channels that are increasing in price.

    >
    > Not for nothing, but owners of the channels have to pay for the
    > content themselves. NBC doesn't own ER, for example, Warner Brothers
    > does. So even though they have their own studio, ER isn't free. And
    > the cost of those kinds of first-run shows has gone up a lot.
    >


    Yes, and NBC makes its money from advertising (commercial) sales.

    > Cable has thrived in large part because most of the programming that
    > people like is relatively inexpensive to produce. I'm talking about
    > niche things like Discovery, Food Network, etc. But again, somebody's
    > got to pay for the content; this is why there's force behind a la
    > carte.


    Do you really think production for programming on Discovery or National
    Geographic is cheap? They are shooting a large amount of their programming in
    high definition now and that equipment alone is not cheap (cameras can cost
    $100K). Think FX, do you think it is cheap to pay Dennis Leary and the gang
    for "Rescue Me"?

    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1




  11. #56
    SMS
    Guest

    Re: Verizon Breaks with Industry, and to begins Pro-rating TerminationFee

    Cyrus Afzali wrote:

    > Not for nothing, but owners of the channels have to pay for the
    > content themselves. NBC doesn't own ER, for example, Warner Brothers
    > does. So even though they have their own studio, ER isn't free. And
    > the cost of those kinds of first-run shows has gone up a lot.


    These shows are ad supported, and broadcast OTA for free.

    > Cable has thrived in large part because most of the programming that
    > people like is relatively inexpensive to produce. I'm talking about
    > niche things like Discovery, Food Network, etc. But again, somebody's
    > got to pay for the content; this is why there's force behind a la
    > carte.


    What's happened is that the cable and satellite providers own many of
    these networks, they essentially raise the prices to themselves, then
    claim that they have to raise rates because content costs went up.



  12. #57
    Tinman
    Guest

    Re: Verizon Breaks with Industry, and to begins Pro-rating Termination Fee

    Cyrus Afzali wrote:
    > On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 08:38:32 -0700, SMS <[email protected]>
    > wrote:
    >> That's what they always claim. What they don't tell you is who owns
    >> many
    >> of the channels that are increasing in price.

    >
    > Not for nothing, but owners of the channels have to pay for the
    > content themselves. NBC doesn't own ER, for example, Warner Brothers
    > does. So even though they have their own studio, ER isn't free. And
    > the cost of those kinds of first-run shows has gone up a lot.


    Methinks you chose a bad example. AFAIK, every NBC broadcast affiliate
    must provide OTA programming. For free; to anyone with a TV and antenna
    capable of receiving it.

    The stations makes (most of) their money on local advertising. The rest
    of the advertising is national, or regional, and most of that money goes
    to NBC themselves.

    If anything, cable helps out the local affiliate by providing (most of
    the time) a clearer picture, often to a larger (potential) audience (not
    always by choice--i.e., "must carry").


    >
    > Cable has thrived in large part because most of the programming that
    > people like is relatively inexpensive to produce. I'm talking about
    > niche things like Discovery, Food Network, etc.


    Isn't "most of the programming people like" and "niche" a contradiction?


    > But again, somebody's
    > got to pay for the content; this is why there's force behind a la
    > carte.


    Of course content must be paid for. But how many times must it be paid?
    I'd be more than happy to buy ad-free content, or even 95% ad-free
    content if that 5% is required for mass-acceptance pricing. But 66%
    ad-free content, that I'm paying to receive, and my cable company is
    paying to receive, is getting old.

    IMHO, YMMV, and all other disclaimers apply.


    --
    Mike





  13. #58
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: Verizon Breaks with Industry, and to begins Pro-rating Termination Fee

    In alt.cellular.t-mobile Tinman <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > Of course content must be paid for. But how many times must it be paid?
    > I'd be more than happy to buy ad-free content, or even 95% ad-free
    > content if that 5% is required for mass-acceptance pricing. But 66%
    > ad-free content, that I'm paying to receive, and my cable company is
    > paying to receive, is getting old.
    >
    > IMHO, YMMV, and all other disclaimers apply.
    >
    >


    Bingo!!!! You hit the nail on the head. This has been my complaint for years
    .... yet I pay like the dog that I am.

    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1




  14. #59
    RM v2.0
    Guest

    Re: Verizon Breaks with Industry, and to begins Pro-rating Termination Fee

    > Deregulation has a clear and consistent track record. In virtually
    > every case, consumers have benefited from lower prices, better
    > services and increased choices. For example, deregulation of the
    > airlines in 1978 has made air travel affordable for millions of
    > Americans. Deregulation of the trucking industry in 1980 has saved
    > consumers billions of dollars in freight costs. Deregulation saved
    > the rail industry from bankruptcy in 1980.
    >

    Only works well if it is truly and fairly deregulated. Govt has a tendency
    to half ass it and ends up screwing everybody.





  15. #60
    Kevin Weaver
    Guest

    Re: Verizon Breaks with Industry, and to begins Pro-rating TerminationFee

    RM v2.0 wrote:
    >> Deregulation has a clear and consistent track record. In virtually
    >> every case, consumers have benefited from lower prices, better
    >> services and increased choices. For example, deregulation of the
    >> airlines in 1978 has made air travel affordable for millions of
    >> Americans. Deregulation of the trucking industry in 1980 has saved
    >> consumers billions of dollars in freight costs. Deregulation saved
    >> the rail industry from bankruptcy in 1980.
    >>

    > Only works well if it is truly and fairly deregulated. Govt has a tendency
    > to half ass it and ends up screwing everybody.
    >
    >

    This pro-rated deal is not to start till sometime this fall. As per *611
    She did not know how far back they would go, If any.



  • Similar Threads




  • Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast