CRTC to allow a-la-carte channel picking

[Dazog]

"Given that transition, the Canadian Association of Broadcasters said it was pleased the CRTC is allowing the industry to make the shift gradually."

Best Line.

No forcing of HD in canada.

Lets let the corporations decide when its best for us to view it, I mean once the USA goes full digital/HD in 2009, how many people will pirate that?

Think about it, getting a nice black border around all your programs because they are shot in HD and we get them dual simsubbed and in 4:3 analog.

I am sooooooo looking forward to what we have today in another 7 years time.

[Jake]

Originally Posted by foxfan

Videotron digital offers à la carte... except there are so many clauses that there isn't much benefit

Foxfan is 100% right. I have a la carted myself blue in the face trying to get my 20 picks while maintaining 50% CANCON. What I don't understand is that you MUST get the basic package with contains primarily Canadian stations yet these CANCON stations don't count towards your CANCON quota. A la carte should be just that, no additional mandatory packages or exclusions. Do you think the industry will head that way? We have no way of knowing.

[Nanuuk]

Back in 2000, right after Telus had finished their first Televison trial, I corresponded with one of their VP's to give her my impression of their service and what they had to do to 'best' Shaw with their offering. One of my points was sim-subbing (Telus didn't during the trial) and the second was a la carte. The VP dug into the whole thing and was quite surprised to find out how much their hands were tied in offering a la carte services. Seems like those Canadian Broadcastin stalwarts such as Alliance Atlantis has the cRTC behind them. Basically if you want one channel of theirs you must take x additional channels. All aided and abetted by the CRTC, the Canadian culture guard dogs that protect us from being unduly influenced by American culture. You never know we migh end up supporting U.S. foreign policy! Of course, cableco's at satco's also use this to their advantage. I belive they take it beyond what is mandated in order to sell more subscriptions.

[shawguy]

I am gonna go against everyone in here and say that I personally like the Tiered system at the moment, its not for everyone I will give it that, but overall you are getting more channels for less money, if everything was pick and pay we would be getting less than what we are now for more money, Pick and Pay to me simply means high cable bills, I prefer bundling and taking some channels I don't want, but overall getting a better value for my dollar.

Shawguy

[foxfan]

I support à la carte because I WANT the majority of specialty networks to be killed-off, and have the remants merged into only a handfull of networks. Even with 200 channels, there are always moments when there's nothing to watch, but you're paying ridiculous prices. Doesn't anyone find it INSANE that there are as many (if not more) Canadian specialty channels than there are American ones?

[Interceptor]

Originally Posted by shawguy

I am gonna go against everyone in here and say that I personally like the Tiered system at the moment, its not for everyone I will give it that, but overall you are getting more channels for less money, if everything was pick and pay we would be getting less than what we are now for more money, Pick and Pay to me simply means high cable bills, I prefer bundling and taking some channels I don't want, but overall getting a better value for my dollar.

Shawguy

How are you getting "a better value" if you are paying for channels you don't watch. You're drinking too much kool-aid.
The suppliers should supply us with what we want, not what they want, and for the same price. We'd get rid of a lot of deadwood channels with their most popular programs finding new homes.

[Nanuuk]

What I really, really hate with bundling and Canada's system is that the government is choosing the winners and losers as a matter of public policy, not us. I wouldn't advocate total a la carte (I'm ok with more themes) until that fateful day when we are all digital and have IPTV. In my dreams, it would be packaged as X$ for 50 channels or Y$ for 100 channels and we get to to pick 'em.

[Alan Bealby]

Originally Posted by Nanuuk

In my dreams, it would be packaged as X$ for 50 channels or Y$ for 100 channels and we get to to pick 'em.

Nice and simple but I would argue that it ignores financial reality. The cost to produce a channel is going to vary depending at least on the cost of production of the particular type of content, the distribution costs and the number of subscribers. I am surprised at the number of Tier 2 digital channels that are available at the same cost a-la-carte.

[Nanuuk]

Ha! That's why I said in my dreams....

[PlayitSimple]

Doesn't anyone find it INSANE that there are as many (if not more) Canadian specialty channels than there are American ones?

Not quite there Foxfan, there are WAY more specialty channels in the US then Canada. Lots of regional channels that don't exist here because Canada is a smaller country then our neighbours to the south, not to mention religious channels, public interest channels, etc. I understand the point you are trying to make, however. My view on this whole A-la a carte issue is why does everyone (in the USA also) believe that a-la A carte must refer to each channel being available by itself? You can still offer me packages its just that 'I" want to pick what channels go in them not the other way around. I will select the 10, 20, 50 or however many channels can go in a package so I can get the ones I want to watch. Digital technology makes it possible for each person to create their own package, so they can't use that as an excuse anymore. Rogers offers this with the diginets so lets expand this to inlcude ALL specialty chanenls! As long as corporations rule the globe, I don't think true Pick n' pay will exist, however that depends on the Internet and the advancement of IPTV.

Check out this list at Wikipedia and see how many channels there are:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ision_networks

[jvillain]

Got to love Wikipedia. The cost you are seeing now for individual channels is artificially inflated to make sure you take the package. When buying 2 channels individually costs more than a group of 12 channels as a bundle that is pretty obvious. The reason for it is that the cable companies still have to negotiate the right to actually carry the channels with the cartels like Chorus etc. And they really couldn't give a damn what the CRTC thinks.

There is nothing stopping them from negotiating a deal like take all our channels and put them in a bundle for $10 or you cave the the individual channels for $15 each. Seems outragous but how many independant channels are there out there? The cable companies could say no but then they loose 25% or so of the channels in the Canadian market for each group they say that to. What cable company is going to have the parts to do that?

So at the end of the day every one will be able to stand up and say they did ala cart but the consumer will still get hosed. Go read the the CRTC decision. At the very top it talks about how important it would be to have input from groups representing consumers. Then in the next million lines it talks about the opinions of the stations and the cable companies over and over and over and not a single word from any one representing consumers. It's buisness as usual at the CRTC.

[PFD]

Originally Posted by Interceptor

How are you getting "a better value" if you are paying for channels you don't watch. You're drinking too much kool-aid.
The suppliers should supply us with what we want, not what they want, and for the same price. We'd get rid of a lot of deadwood channels with their most popular programs finding new homes.

I agree that in the end the non-tiered system will be more expensive. As it is now, yes, I do get channels I don't watch often. But is good to have because you never know when IFC shows a decent flick.

Every now and then Telelatino might show a soccer game that Fox doesn't show. Sometimes Drive In shows a cool movie from the 60s that I've always wanted to see.

I hardly watch these three channels but am glad I have them. If I have to start paying for each channel individually, I probably will lose them

[westmanguy]

Bundled Groups or theme packages are good in some cases for digital cable, my system is setup by, the more theme packs you get the lower the per pack price gets, and A La Carte is available at 2.49 The only time A La Carte makes sense, is if there is only 1 or 2 channels in a theme pack that you want, if not makes more sense to go with the theme pack.

[trapper38]

Originally Posted by Dazog

"Given that transition, the Canadian Association of Broadcasters said it was pleased the CRTC is allowing the industry to make the shift gradually."

Best Line.

No forcing of HD in canada.

Lets let the corporations decide when its best for us to view it, I mean once the USA goes full digital/HD in 2009, how many people will pirate that?

Think about it, getting a nice black border around all your programs because they are shot in HD and we get them dual simsubbed and in 4:3 analog.

I am sooooooo looking forward to what we have today in another 7 years time.

I was walking the dog a couple of weeks ago around the Plateau in Montreal and spotted The CBC shooting a comedy (which I can't remember the name of) series down one of the streets. Anyway they were having a break and got talking to one of the engineers and asked him if they were filming in HD, he just laughed and replied, "no, there is still a great resistance to HD in Canada". I also asked him if he had HDTV at home, he said no and he wouldn't be buying one for at least 2 years because of lack of HD content and advised me the same. Whether I can wait 2 years is another question...

[classicsat]

Still, HD would only be an option, I suppose, but transitioning to digital broadcasting might bring the opportunity to create HD programming to the forefront.