Comtrash Loses 275,000 Basic Subscribers.

MrPogi

Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
#3
Keep in mind, the "Average bill" includes cable, internet and phone. And it doesn't include wondermous invented taxes like "Utah Video Tax", "911 fee" (TWICE on one bill, plus a "911 fee" on my water bill???) and the "Widowed Orpans Fund" (Okay, I made that last one up, but I am sure its coming!) Still a lot of money. Its more than my average winter gas bill!

I pay $45 a month for phone, internet, and TV. Add $9 for Netflix, sometimes, and $8 for a tracfone. Lotta bang for the buck.
 

dkreichen1968

Moderator
Staff member
#4
Back in April of 2009, slow internet, 100 channels, and DVR rental went up from $80 to $99 per month for regular price. Faster internet, 150 channels, DVR, & phone was $150 per month. Now I hear that internet only is $55 per month. But, since they only have to compete against Qwest (the telecomm with a death wish) they can get away with it.
 
Last edited:

MrPogi

Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
#6
Damn those unprofitable customers.

They should burn in hell for not wanting to pay more than what a product is worth. We should put them all to death, and eat their children, thus saving the good stuff in this country for those that, by the very nature of their wealth and willingness to enhance the wealth of corporate America, have proven themselves to be far superior beings.

And a nice snack for their TV viewing pleasure.
 

dkreichen1968

Moderator
Staff member
#7
Well, what I've heard is that Comcast is actually trying to deal. A friend of mine got Comcast to agree to a $99 a month 3 year deal for phone, internet, and TV. He had been paying $130 per month from DISH and Qwest for only 1.5 Mbps internet service. Of course the only reason he got that is he was willing to play hardball. Regular price is that $150 number. And, their "basic" service is a total rip off. $25 per month for no subchannels. I just see no reason to pay for TV when it's free. I might gain two channels I'd watch if I paid $60 a month. That would be $30 per channel per month.

They've also ran an intro-offer for phone and internet for $25 per service per month for a year. Again, jumps up to $75 per month after that. Who needs a landline phone anyway?
 
Last edited:

bicker

DTVUSA Member
#8
Damn those unprofitable customers.
Actually for legacy service providers, dumping unprofitable customers on competitors is a superior solution, since it requires your competitor to incur the same kind of costs that regulation had previously imposed only on you.

They should burn in hell for not wanting to pay more than what a product is worth.
That is utter idiocy. What's wrong with you?
 

bicker

DTVUSA Member
#9
Well, what I've heard is that Comcast is actually trying to deal.
All the service providers "deal" to get new customers. What they don't do anymore is "deal" to keep low profit or unprofitable customers. With only minor exception, most of the legacy service providers are now requiring either 3 play service, or at least an upgrade from your current level of service, in order to qualify for a second or subsequent promotional rate on the same account.

A friend of mine got Comcast to agree to a $99 a month 3 year deal for phone, internet, and TV.
Yup, they want everyone on 3 play. That's a profitable offering, as opposed to what "basic subscribers" select.
 

dkreichen1968

Moderator
Staff member
#11
Well, but if we think about this thing, most people have cell phones, so a landline is an unneeded expense. And TV is free, so that's an unneeded expense. And you can get 7 Mbps service from the phone company for $42 per month. And, a magicjack is $30 per year. So, for $99 a month your getting $45 worth of services. Yep, that's worth it.??
 

bicker

DTVUSA Member
#13
Yep, that's worth it.??
Each person needs to make that determination for themselves, and then collectively consumers-as-a-group make that determination for the marketplace. If it wasn't worth $99, they wouldn't be charging $99.

Only idiots pay $99 for $45 worth of services, and the implication that the vast majority of people around you are idiots would be reprehensibly arrogant.
 

dkreichen1968

Moderator
Staff member
#15
Yep. Thats the facts. Sorry.
Agreed,

People just don't take the time to research what their options are. They let the competing ads for pay-TV providers do that for them. They just assume that they must pay for television, and that they must get it from either a cable or satellite provider. Meanwhile most, if not all of what they watch is on free broadcast, or they wouldn't miss it if they didn't have it. If that makes them idiots, then the vast majority of people around me are idiots, and I don't think it makes me arrogant to say that, just honest.
 

MrPogi

Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
#16
There are options for free TV that aren't pushed by large advertising budgets. OTA, internet streaming, and also FTA satellite.

FTA is a well kept secret. It costs about $150 - $300 plus install, and a higher level of technical knowledge that PayTV, OTA, or streaming require - one of the reasons its not as popular as it could be. Still, new the newer systems, once installed, do a good job of finding channels and satellites.

As soon as I've saved some cash, I will be investing in a system.
 

MrPogi

Moderator, , Webmaster of Cache Free TV
Staff member
#17
I just dug this up on the net:

Here is 2009 advertising spending for Comcast and its five competitors.
  • Verizon: $2.2 billion
  • AT&T: $1.9 billion
  • Sprint: $1.1 billion
  • Comcast: $439 million
  • DirecTV: $401 million
  • Dish Network: $385 million
Source: Comcast Makes Classic Marketing Mistake: Branding Strategy Insider

Total advertising budget of pay TV is about 6.425 BILLION, not including the small players. How does ANY free TV even begin to compete with that kind of money?

OTA has an advertising budget of about ME.
 
Last edited:

dkreichen1968

Moderator
Staff member
#20
It's very strange how some people, in saying that someone is wrong or foolish, can use the argument that it's disrespectful to say that someone is wrong or foolish. Some of us just love to bicker and pick fights. Now, a certain bickering person did make some good points, but then negated them by their self-incriminating argument. Very much someone who is disrespectful to those around him. It's certainly strange that he can't seem to see it.
 
Top