Everybody knows how bad their service is. But I have to admit their On Demand service is nice for catching up on shows. That is, as long as they are current.
Then I tried to pick up on binge-watching The Americans again after being distracted halfway through season 2. But season 3 had already started, and they were now charging 2 bucks per episode! Well, it was on Amazon Prime as well for no extra price, so screw that.
Then just recently I thought I’d try binge-watching the Fargo series, and same thing- 2 bucks per episode for season 1 (or $16 to get the whole season, thanks for the discount xfinity).
How in this day of Netflix, Amazon Prime and Hulu, in which you have a low monthly payment to watch all the old tv shows you want, can they get away with a per episode charge on top of the exorbitant cable fees I’m already paying every month? If I could find an aerial that worked well in my area, I swear I would get rid of cable.
Well, you’d have to subscribe to Amazon Prime and Hulu Plus to get those shows (without a per ep charge). A lot of people would rather just pay for the eps they want to watch rather than subscribing to a service and then 6 months later realizing, oh crap, I’ve been paying $10 a month and not watching anything.
I wonder how many people equate high price to bad customer service?
I’ve had comcast/xfinity for over 10 years and while yes, it get’s damn expensive, I’ve never had a problem with their service. Cable TV / phone / internet has pretty much been trouble free and the few times I’ve had problems I get right through to their customer service people and they solve my problems efficiently and are very pleasant about it.
On the other hand when I’ve had satellite, while it was the cheaper route, I found the service to be sub par.
Except that you can’t get OnDemand without already being a cable subscriber, which is kind of the OP’s point. If you only want to watch a few select eps, you can get them for around $2 each from either Vudu or Amazon Video (without Prime). WIthout paying for “free on-demand” that may not even have what you want…
If you dump cable altogether, Hulu’s $8/12 rate (the latter for no ads, and I went for it like a shark for chum) is a pretty good deal. I wouldn’t subscribe to Prime for the video access alone, but it’s a very nice additional feature.
But most people enjoy being cable subscribers. The On Demand is an add on to that cable subscription. Lots of people would prefer the convenience of going through On Demand than getting a subscription service - that’s how that business model works for XFinity.
Yes, I was ignoring the plethora of web sites where people congregate to sing hymns to their blessed cable providers. :rolleyes:
We used OD fairly often until we dumped cable - actually, we watched almost nothing current or in first-scheduled-run, but caught up at our convenience with on-demand. It took far too long to realize that we didn’t need “cable” to watch stuff after the fact at our convenience.
You also don’t need a “subscription” service - everything is available a la carte if you don’t want to pay for a whole season. No fee past the $2 or so per episode.
If you watch enough stuff, Hulu plus Amazon Prime turns into quite a bargain.
The only remaining reason to hang on to traditional cable is live sports, and that picture is slowly changing as the leagues renegotiate their media rights in the new world.
I think of them as a service provider, not a content provider. It has never occurred to me to pay them for specific shows. But if they can get a little extra money for themselves that way from people who are willing to pay them for that content… oh well.
The business model is probably “hope the customers don’t notice that there are cheaper options” while raising prices to cover the defections by those who do. This has traditionally worked rather well for renting out routers/modems. A lot of people don’t have the time or energy or tech savvy to research alternatives.
Comcast is really not all that bad. I suppose this is like saying Beelzebub is only the second worst demon in Hell, but still… the only thing worse than Comcast is the alternative.
As for on-demand pricing: if people pay it, they get away with it. If people don’t pay it, they don’t get away with it. If Comcast reduced prices to half, they’d need twice as many watchers to get the same gross revenue from it and I presume they’re smart enough to have done that math already. (Also, WAG here: Comcast’s licensing deals probably mean this is not quite so profitable for them as users might assume. )
Comcast does have some sort of subscription service (StreamPix?) that works more like Hulu, making a lot of on-demand content free under the subscription. Like Hulu, that only helps if the subscription includes the shows you want. Thanks to licensing deals, no one provider can offer every show.
The OP obviously is a subscriber and most people I know are subscribers. When I tell people I don’t have cable, I’m usually met with a “why”.
Well, yes… and that’s what OnDemand is also offering. So why would a cable subscriber go to some other service to pay for the episode when their OD offers it?
Xfinity is an add-on for existing Comcast customers. It is not in the same market as Hulu, Netflix, or Prime. The live streams are another free service they offer.
How is it that you’re watching Netflix, Amazon Prime and Hulu? Presumably you have a fast internet connection at home. Your choices for that are limited. For many people, the fastest available is through the cable company. So you could drop cable service but you might still be paying Comcast for internet. (And I suspect you’ll find that internet only is only slightly cheaper than the bundle.)
And I’ve read that the internet service is more profitable for them than the cable service. That was said to be one reason they didn’t object too much when HBO started to offer a streaming-only service.
Only as long as bundle prices apply. They typically have a limited time and escalate after a year or two. Paying 2-3 times as much as an initial period is common.
Yes, you can play jump-the-provider game and move from one “introductory period” to the next. Assuming you have more than one provider, care to go through the hassle, and think the added charges of installation and “activation” and so forth are worth it.
Or you can realize you just don’t watch all that much “cable” and cut the cord. That’s a rapidly rising tide for a good reason.
No Hulu. I got Amazon Prime for the free shipping-- the Prime movies and TV offerings are just gravy. I bit on Netflix because I was one of the first to get a Chromcast because the intiial offer of 3 free months of Netflix made it a no-brainer purchase. After that I was happy enough with NF to keep at $8/mo.
As for dropping cable, yes, Comcast is currently the fastest internet connection so even if I cut the cable I would probably stick with CC for internet. It would be a bit more than a third of what I’m paying now for cable + internet. The only other option here is ATT UVerse, and even an ATT rep admitted CC’s internet speed is significantly faster than them. Oh, to get Google fiber in the metro Detroit area! When that day happens I’m cancelling Comcast immediately.
Suprising amount of support for CC/XF in this thread it seems (and as far as I’m concerned, they are one business entity). My point is that with all the competition CC/XF is getting in the one-fee low-cost subscription content model, it seems suprising that they’re doubling down with the price-gouging:
[ul]
[li]They didn’t use to charge for old basic cable tv seasons- that’s relatively recent. [/li][li]When the modem rental went up to a ridiculous $10/mo., I bought a Motorola 6141. It’s already paid for itself. Ha![/li][/ul]
Their main advantage right now is their near-monopoly on fast internet, and that will change in the near future.
Of course they’re one business entity. Comcast is the parent company and Xfinity is the brand name they use for their cable, telephone and internet services. My parents get cable through Cablevision of Southern Connecticut, but it’s branded as “Optimum”. I don’t know why these cable companies set up separate brands for their cable service
In Comcast’s case, it’s because they bought NBC/Universal. They now use Comcast as an umbrella name, NBC Universal for their various TV channels and productions, Universal for movies, and Xfinity for their telecom services that they’ve always offered.
Why not just keep Comcast for telecom, especially since that’s what everyone who uses them (or hates them) continues to call them anyway, that’s a question for their marketing wonks, I guess.