# A la carte cable TV... **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 27, 2002, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-la-carte-cable-tv/145069 "2002-12-27T00:59:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![black\_rabbit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/f19dbf/32.png) [@black\_rabbit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/black_rabbit)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2002, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-la-carte-cable-tv/145069/1 "2002-12-27T00:59:57Z")
I just stumbled across [this article](http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/nov2002/tc2002116_0167.htm) in Business Week (via Slashdot) on the new FCC rule requiring cable companies to offer some of their channels a la carte rather than in tiers. Woah, says I. Right now, I’m paying 85 bucks a month so I can watch CNN Headline, HBO and Showtime on demand, and occasionally TechTV. So is this for real? Has anybody managed to actually save any money on this yet? Time Warner Cincinnati’s web site is, of course, mum. I’ll be calling the customer service line tomorrow, once my girlfriend and I decide which channels are going to get the axe. Anything in particular that I should know before I go in with guns blazing? If this belongs in IMHO, I apologize. ---
**Author:** ![Ferret\_Herder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e47774/32.png) [@Ferret\_Herder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ferret_Herder)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2002, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-la-carte-cable-tv/145069/2 "2002-12-27T01:07:05Z")
:eek: I hadn’t even heard of this. I have an obscene amount of channels with our service and we rarely watch more than a handful. ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2002, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-la-carte-cable-tv/145069/3 "2002-12-27T01:52:33Z")
Whoa, that is cool! It looks like it’s for real, but the article says that for obvious reasons, the cable companies aren’t going to publicize it. > [@](#): > > It’s no mystery why cable operators haven’t made a big push to publicize this option. While most of their growth now comes from new services such as high-speed Internet access, television still accounts for the bulk of revenues. In the third quarter, 44% of cable behemoth Comcast’s $2.75 billion in revenues came from traditional TV customers, while Cox relied on TV service for 68% of its $1.67 billion in revenues. > > MONEY-SAVING OPTION. Moreover, cable operators frequently use their programming packages to pressure customers into expensive services, such as digital cable. Last year, Time Warner Cable told analog cable subscribers in New York City that they would no longer receive various channels, including HBO 2 and HBO Family, unless they upgraded to digital service – at the cost of an additional $9.95 a month. “This fits their M.O.,” says David Butler, media director for Consumer’s Union. “Cable operators know that if customers have the option of paying less and getting fewer, better channels, many would scale back and save money.” > > A spokeswoman for the Federal Communications Commission says the agency can’t require cable operators to advertise the new option because that would violate the constitutional right to free speech. > > \< snip \> > > The only network coming clean with consumers is Starz. The Denver-based company, a wholly owned subsidiary of Liberty Media, which also owns Discovery Network, could theoretically be hurt if more cable viewers were to opt for only premium channels. But Starz sees the new rule as a huge opportunity to add subscribers to its movie offering. ---
**Author:** ![ski](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bbe5ce/32.png) [@ski](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ski)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2002, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-la-carte-cable-tv/145069/4 "2002-12-27T02:22:43Z")
I love the idea of paying only for the channels you watch, but why is the government involved? This is not the type of thing that should be legislated. Free enterprise/capitalism will determine the rate structure that the market will bear, right? If enough people refuse to pay for service the current way, the companies would have to change it. Sounds simple to me. ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2002, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-la-carte-cable-tv/145069/5 "2002-12-27T02:28:05Z")
Bad news, your rates are going to go _up_ next month. The FCC rule is quite limited and the Cable Co.s have already figured out ways around it. Are you surprised at all? ---
**Author:** ![chique](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@chique](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chique)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2002, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-la-carte-cable-tv/145069/6 "2002-12-27T02:42:28Z")
I’m not able to take advantage of this new law, but count me in as one of those people annoyed about subsidizing someone else’s Golf or Praise Gawd channels while I have to pay extra for Bravo. How technically feasible is it for each consumer to pick his or her channel package? Is there a reason (outside of profit) that I can’t pay a dollar or two a month per channel of my own choice? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Frink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/977dab/32.png) [@Mr.Frink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Frink)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2002, 8:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-la-carte-cable-tv/145069/7 "2002-12-27T08:44:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ski \* > \*\*I love the idea of paying only for the channels you watch, but why is the government involved? This is not the type of thing that should be legislated. Free enterprise/capitalism will determine the rate structure that the market will bear, right? If enough people refuse to pay for service the current way, the companies would have to change it. Sounds simple to me. \*\* Yes…_but_…many cities grant a cable franchise to only one company–so there’s really no free market competition. So, cable companies need _some_ sort of regulation in order to protect consumers… ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2002, 10:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-la-carte-cable-tv/145069/8 "2002-12-27T10:53:26Z")
Funny I thought of this about a month ago. I figured I really only want maybe 3 channels. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2002, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-la-carte-cable-tv/145069/9 "2002-12-27T15:01:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ski \* > \*\*I love the idea of paying only for the channels you watch, but why is the government involved? This is not the type of thing that should be legislated. Free enterprise/capitalism will determine the rate structure that the market will bear, right? If enough people refuse to pay for service the current way, the companies would have to change it. Sounds simple to me. \*\* Not where a monopoly is involved. And cable companies are usually monopolies in their service areas. The government deregulating cable is one major reason why cable companies keep sticking it to their customers. They know that people will pay anything they ask, since they have no other option. If you think the threat of a boycott scares cable companies, you’re sadly deluded. ---
**Author:** ![norinew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/eb9ed0/32.png) [@norinew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/norinew)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2002, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-la-carte-cable-tv/145069/10 "2002-12-27T15:14:47Z")
Not only do we only have one cable provider available to us, but since we live down in the valley, if we don’t get cable, we get no reception at all. So, if we want TV, we’ve gotta have cable, and if we want cable, we gotta have our sole service provider put it in for us. ---
**Author:** ![aahala](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a88e4f/32.png) [@aahala](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aahala)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2002, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-la-carte-cable-tv/145069/11 "2002-12-27T16:39:13Z")
Consumers get screwed by the channel owners as well, as many of the cable channels are owned by a handful of companies. They want to sell their entire package, if they offer a channel separately, we pay thru the nose. ---
**Author:** ![Hello\_Again](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/85e7bf/32.png) [@Hello\_Again](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hello_Again)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2002, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-la-carte-cable-tv/145069/12 "2002-12-27T19:13:21Z")
Am I reading the article wrong? As far as I can see, it isn’t actually offering “a la carte” cable service. It’s just satying you can buy Premium channels (HBO, Showtime, etc.) _without_ buying expanded Basic cable. For instance, you could get just network channels+HBO. Or you could get basic cable + HBO. But you can’t get network channels+ Comedy Central, TLC, and the History Channel and screw all the rest. ---
**Author:** ![Bjorn240](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a5b964/32.png) [@Bjorn240](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bjorn240)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2003, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-la-carte-cable-tv/145069/13 "2003-01-08T22:59:21Z")
Hello Again is right. I just spent some time with Time Warner NYC resolving this. Generally, to get HBO and Showtime in NYC, you have to sign up for (at minimum) DigitalTV plus two premium channels, where the cost breaks out to: DTV: $49.95 (broadcast + 138 cable channels) +2 Premium: $14.23 Total: $64.18 What the new (1992+10yrs) ruling says, is that the cable company cannot require you to get more than the base cable package, to add _premium_ channels, which are otherwise available for single purchase (eg HBO, Showtime). So, you can now sign up for: Basic Cable: $17.86 (broadcast, NY1, PBS) +2 Premium: $14.23 Total: $32.09 So, basically, you can save $32/month, if you are willing to forgo all “standard” cable channels. If you are a hard-core “Sopranos,” “Oz,” or “Sex and the City” fan, or really like boxing, this makes sense. Otherwise, maybe not. BTW, if you call your cable company, you will need to reference the rulling in question. TWCNYC may also want it in writing – or maybe I was the very first to call them about this, and they’ll relax that requirement now. It is US Code Title 47 Section 543, alternately called Tit. 47, Chap 5, SubChap V-A, Part III (Regulation of Rates). The paragraphs detailing this are 8.A and 8.B.ii 8.B.ii discusses the 10year horizon, which just expired, for exceptions. Ignorance eradicated? - Bjorn240