It's interesting how Shaw charges $5.99/month to have it's vod service of
Movie Central.

Rogers just launched theirs and it's no charge as long as your a sub to the movies package. This is how I think it should be.

This is from Cablecaster : http://www.cablecastermagazine.com/article.asp?id=31760&issue=06172004

Shaw should take some lessons from this. Or if it's the actual Movie Central that decides, they should.

Shaw (basically) owns MC, so they can make more money.
someone will go into the ownership of MC, it's been discussed on the forums before.

I think SOD movies should be the same price as PPV too.

Actually, I'm having trouble logging on to SOD. Any thoughts? My logons are not working, and the page is just reloading.

I think SOD movies should be the same price as PPV too.

Or PPV the same price as SOD as SOD movies are $3.99 while PPV is $4.99

Shawguy

Actually, I'm having trouble logging on to SOD. Any thoughts? My logons are not working, and the page is just reloading.

I am still having this problem (http://www.digitalhomecanada.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=15127)

and once again today I can't log into the site either!

Shawguy

I don't think Shaw should be charging for MCE either and if they still insist on charging, charge less!!! (like $1.99) Maybe they will if and when they launch SOD on the Digital Cable Terminals.

Shawguy

I think they price the Vod content movies that are not a part of the Express service at $3.99 a shot, a dollar lower than ppv movies. That seems fine, especially since they are moving them to the vod end long after they have run on their ppv cycle.

Shaw's vod service won't really take off until they integrate it with their IPG's like other providers in North America. You shouldn't have to log on to order. Should just be a remote click away.

I just thought that it was interesting that Rogers provides Vod movies from their movie networks at no charge whereas Shaw is charging $5.99/month for the MC express service.

Shaw pioneered the VOD and MCE product, and set a price on that R&D, deployment and whatnot at 5.99 per month. If Rogers wants to lose out on an avenue of revenue that is their fault.

Of course that is also training their market to believing that new features should always be free. Less money coming in, means no future developments.

That is why I don't get it when people say that Shaw is behind the times. They are pioneers in many areas in Canada and North America.

Shaw pioneered the VOD and MCE product, and set a price on that R&D, deployment and whatnot at 5.99 per month. If Rogers wants to lose out on an avenue of revenue that is their fault.

Of course that is also training their market to believing that new features should always be free. Less money coming in, means no future developments.

That is why I don't get it when people say that Shaw is behind the times. They are pioneers in many areas in Canada and North America.

Or maybe Rogers sees it as just another way of attracting customers to sign up for the regular movie package, and perhaps they make enough money on the package itself that they don't need to gouge...oops.. I mean charge their customers extra for the new feature.

Friedchicken, you are so out of touch with the consumer perspective on these things that it's not even funny. When you are operating in virtually a monopoly position (as all the cable companies do) it's not wise to have this "charge as much as possible for every possible revenue stream" attitude that you seem to ooze. While I realize you are just one (misguided, insensitive) voice, my fear is that your attitude may actually reflect the attitude of those in charge at Shaw.

Pioneers indeed... I guess you mean at milking revenue streams to death rather than attempting to achieve a balance between revenue and customer satisfaction with your services. Did you ever think that the reason you "don't get it" is because you are so blinded by your corporate loyalty that you don't genuinely understand your customers' perspective?

I agree with your statement that they are pioneers, as they were the only provider who didn't go with the remote ordering of vod like everyone else did. What is the true advantage to the consumer by going this route?. I can't figure out what it is or has been.

To me this particular instance of "pioneering" wasn't thought out properly. They themselves have stated that they are now looking into more market share if they go the remote/ipg route.

Ask the majority of people and they will say they prefer the ordering through the remote. Way more convenient for the consumer, just plain ease of use.

In the digital cable and Hd channels offering they are definitely not
pioneers,ie timeshifting and amount of Hd channels, choice of new specialty channel offerings.

I think Rogers is ahead of them on those fronts. I'd say those are pretty important fronts for a cable operator. Heck I could even mention their internet. Rogers just asks you to buy a new modem for their version of Extreme and no additional monthly rate.

Just my opinion though. There are pros and cons to each provider. When comparing to Rogers it seems like Shaw has more cons.

technut, please tell me how you REALLY feel?

Seriously tho... I pay for these services (as a consumer) also and it's justified. Just because I recognise both the consumer and suppliers side, doesn't mean that I am out of touch or "misguided, insensitive". People here may dislike me and my position on issues, however I will not sugar coat, water down or misguide to make my point.

Rather than be being insensitive, maybe you are too sensative? Just a thought.

If you are a technical person, I would think that you, above all others would understand how a pricing structure has to reflect R&D, support and production costs.

Anyting that isn't free :roll: is considered a price gouge. Another discussion that was going on here is how shameful it is for a company to supply premium services or features and then have regular Joe Cable subsidize in his/her cable bill. It's amazing how hypocrytical alot of you are when it comes down to I have to pay for something to get it. Rogers may make that a free feature of their service offering, but I will guarantee you that cost is recovered somewhere else.

Folks, the price is the price. No one is forcing you to take MCE. You can either invest $800 in a PVR or pay $6/mo to watch MC titles when you want.

Pioneers indeed... I guess you mean at milking revenue streams to death rather than attempting to achieve a balance between revenue and customer satisfaction with your services.
I suppose you have facts and figures to support this supposition? I guess Shaw got over 1M Internet customers in 4 years by making them unsatisfied and overcharging for their service.

"blah blah blah corporate loyalty blah blah blah customers... "

My position is all about the customers' perspective. Without that relationship and understanding, I wouldn't be able to do my job.

If you are offended by what I say, send the admin an email or hit the back button- but don't slag a company without the whole picture to make an educated post.

Main Entry: mo·nop·o·ly
Pronunciation: m&-'nä-p(&-)lE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -lies
Etymology: Latin monopolium, from Greek monopOlion, from mon- + pOlein to sell
1 : exclusive ownership through legal privilege, command of supply, or concerted action
2 : exclusive possession or control
3 : a commodity controlled by one party
4 : one that has a monopoly

Per www.m-w.com

Shaw/Rogers/Telus/Bell are not even close to this now with the new right of way and non-exclusivity laws set by the CRTC. There are other providers/options out there, but none of them are even close to the capability of a Shaw or Rogers.

Just because alternate providers are not attractive doesn't mean that Shaw is the "only choice". But in some areas, it is the best choice and in other areas it's not the best choice. Figure out what matters most to you and go with that provider. Don't dish on any one company because it's not the best in every area. Shaw is the leader of VOD service- albeit at a cost (there is a cost to be the best). Shaw is not the leader in HD (but very close considering it's free).

Friedchicken, I agree with Technut re: Shaw.

I don't think anyone hates you as we are all just expressing our opinions and sharing ideas etc.

Just by using Rogers as an example because thats what we used to have in B.C.. Shaw is lagging. I know you say that they are pioneering but in what aspect?. I don't think that I can think of one thing that Shaw is more advanced on than Rogers. Perhaps you can? if so let us know. Shaw's idea to integrate online ordering with their Vod offering is just one example of not thinking what the customer would like best and what would definitely work in a real world environment. I mean US providers for example went the remote/ipg route as well as other operators here in Canada. It seems like Shaw Mgr's, Vp's etc just come up with an idea that they like and just do it. If someone disagrees, they likely get turfed.

No consideration is taken into what the majority of customers would prefer. This is one area where they need to build strength which will result in happier subs.

Im not trying to slag Shaw but from a customer viewpoint, they are lacking. I mean if we didn't know what other providers in North America
provide their consumers I would have to say Shaw is the ultimate service.

Problem is... word gets out re: services and products,pricing.

Folks, the price is the price. No one is forcing you to take MCE. You can either invest $800 in a PVR or pay $6/mo to watch MC titles when you want.
No we can't. We should have been able to by now, but we can't.
And 9 titles is hardly a library for MCE.
I can't wait for a PVR. Set it and forget it, much like the Ronco Rotissarie. It will basically eliminate the need for SOD/VOD services. Hopefully the dual tuner is available shortly after the 6208.

Sith, those are genuine questions.

You want example of what Shaw has pioneered? Its Intenet/broadband network. At the time, it was unlike any other in how it handled traffic, how it could scale and it's reliability. Many cable companies from the US looked at Shaw's topography as a model for their networks.

Their VOD offerings. Shaw was the first to provide true Video on Demand services to all of their customers across Canada. The most advance cable broadbad network in combination with the highest digital set top box penitration combined to make VOD and SOD viable.

NPVR. This is still vaporware, but so was VOD when it was written on a napkin. I expect this to become a reality.

There are many projects in the works that no one else is doing. Some of them will be shelved and some will see the light of day.

As for drawing comparisons to Rogers, what has Rogers Pioneered? By having a couple more channels your definition of the "best" company? Reliability, cost, support, community involvment... all these play some part in peoples decisions to choose a provider. I could get my Internet cheaper. But I will not give up my high speed. It's rock solid, always up and fast as heck. I'll pay extra to eat steak instead of settling for a McDonalds hamburger.

Friedchicken, good thing you bring your flame suit with you at all times. I would think it is mandatory equipment for Shaw employees who attempt to defend the company against angry customers. :)

Although your posts rub me the wrong way sometimes, I do appreciate that you take the time to come to this forum and the last thing I want to do is chase you away. So my apologies, I'm going to try to be less personal about my comments.

Shaw, and all the original cable companies, are in a privileged position because the government granted them a monopoly while they built a cable infrastructure. That infrastructure was paid for by consumers of the monopoly cable service in their area.

It is very difficult for any other provider to compete with that massive existing infrastructure.

And as a big-business oriented person, you must realize it would be virtually impossible for a competitor to duplicate that infrastructure now, in an open market.

So the cable companies still hold a huge advantage as a result of the historical monopoly. That is the only reason that you are able to proudly trumpet about how "alternate providers are not attractive" and "none of them are even close to the capability of a Shaw or Rogers". It's not because Shaw is so good at what they do... it's simply because Shaw is still capitalizing on the HUGE advantage they were granted.

[warning... rant level increases rapidly from this point forward]
(yes, I'm having a bad day)

Every service that you say Shaw "pioneered" (cable internet, VOD, etc) is only possible because it is based on the advantage that Shaw has in this uncompetitive market. They owe their advantageous position to the government and to the choiceless consumers who funded their cable infrastructure.

With that in mind... care to reconsider your arrogance about how superior Shaw is? And how lucky we consumers are to now have Shaw lording our infrastructure over us?

Understand the history of how Shaw got in this position and you can begin to understand where your customers come from and why Shaw's (and your) attitude is so offensive to me at times. You both need to eat a little humble pie and realize that Shaw owes everything they are to the lowly Joe Public who gave Shaw this position of privilege.

Friedchicken,

How can Shaw be the leader of VOD services, if you have to log onto the internet to order movies? This, when ALL other North American cable operators allow customes to order directly through the remote. Many of these providers use the same digital cable platform as Shaw. Also, has Shaw even fixed some of the issues they have had with certain models of digital boxes not being able to control VOD with the remote control (stop, pause, REW, FF), instead having to log onto the computer to pause the movie.

True, Rogers could make extra revenue by charging customers for TMN OnDemand, but there are so many reasons not to. First, it gives them a competitive advantage over Bell ExpressVu. Rogers charges $18.95 for M 1-5, Mpix 1 & 2 and the US Supers. Now, at no extra charge, customers can access up to 40 movies per month on demand with VCR functionality. Bell charges $19.95 for the same package, less the On Demand service. Satellite simply cannot offer VOD in its current form. Also, this allows TMN subscribers who have never bothered to use Rogers On Demand, an opportunity to see the benefits of it while watching a movie, and may be more tempted to use ROD when they order a movie next time.

Consumers do not like being charged extra for every little thing, and appreciate when a company they do business with gives them more services without them having to pay extra. It shows the consumer that the company cares and appreciates their business. If a service is good value, customers will recommend it to their friends, and will probably continue to do business with the company.

Just my two cents.

-- Dan

Two thoughts on this thread:

The first is the suggestion that Rogers is giving their customers a better deal by offering VOD for free. Leaving HD out of this thread, without VOD, I pay Shaw $88/month for the Total Home Package (Regular Cable/Digital/Timeshift/MC/High Speed Internet). The comparable Rogers package is $112. While I do have some complaints about Shaw content (esp. HD), I have none about the value. Considering the price of the Shaw bundle, $5.99 for MCE is more than fair and still substantially cheaper than Rogers.

The second is the comments made earlier in the thread that we would be better served by a completely open market (eg. Rogers and Shaw competing side by side). We might get a little more selection, but we would sacrifice price. Our cable/internet costs would be much closer to what a US consumer pays (30% without factoring exchange). The simple fact is that, for the historical reasons relayed by others, Shaw (or any of the cablecos) have a huge economies of scale to their infrastructure that serve to keep prices down. If Shaw no longer has the ability to defray infrastructure costs over the current economies of scale (those provided by exclusively serving large geographic and demographic areas), our costs go up substantially.

I pay Shaw $88/month for the Total Home Package
$86.95 for me - Yeah!

I agree with Technut on the fact that Shaw does have a big advantage in the market due to things that happened in the past.

I don't have any support to back this up - but I have heard several rumours that VOD will be available through the BOX by the end of this year.

I agree that once VOD is available on the STB, more people will use it.

and friedchicken, some of the things Shaw has "pioneered" on - Nobody wants! - pioneering their VOD system, of course no one else does it this way, cause they aren't trying to force people to get their internet to use a digital service.

I would have to say that Shaw's Internet network was good, but in recent years/months is starting to fall apart. - It's almost like Shaw can only focus on one thing at a time - For a while all time and money went into Internet, letting Digital TV fall behind, now they are focusing on TV and letting Internet be pushed back, so once they are done TV upgrading will they go back to Internet? - Why not keep both up at once?

I agree with Kinstud that MCE is a joke, I had it for a month, hated the fact that I had to use my PC to access it and lack of new titles, so I cancelled it as fast as I got it. - Like I said if Shaw Must charge for this, charge less or bundle it with something.

Shawguy