What does the pick-and-pay model mean for TV?
Cable companies have less than a month to detail what their new, mandatory low-cost TV package and pick-and-pay options will look like. We want to hear from you: What do you think the pick-and-pay model means for the future of TV? Weigh in via CBC Forum.
-
Welcome to CBC Forum, a live, hosted discussion where readers can talk about stories of national interest and the issues that arise from them.
CBC Forum is here to encourage a different kind of conversation. Our aim is to have a thoughtful debate on issues that matter to Canadians and to reflect a diversity of opinion.
Tell us your story. Give us your unique point of view. We will attempt to feature as many voices as possible in our discussion, and we will showcase some posts and stories on other parts of CBCNews.ca.Thanks for your participation in the discussion. Commenting on the forum is now closed.
-
Hello there and happy Tuesday! This is CBC Forum, our new attempt to encourage a different kind of discussion on our website. Thanks for popping by.
-
Today, we are talking about cable companies and the pick-and-pay pricing model. Last year, the CRTC announced a ruling that forces cable and satellite providers to provide skinny basic packages and pick-and-pay options to consumers by March 1, 2016.But CBC News has found that none of the big TV providers have shared any details just yet. Sophia Harris wrote all about the companies keeping mum in a piece published this morning, which you can read below.
In less than a month, big changes are coming that will usher in a new era of pick-and-pay television. But it appears none of the major cable and satellite TV companies wants to talk about it.
-
We want to hear what the changes mean to you. Weigh in via our forum.What do you think the pick-and-pay model means for the future of TV? Why do you think cable companies aren't sharing details yet? Is the pick-and-pay model better?
-
Thankfully my basic cable package is $0. Now we just need to do something about the heinous Internet prices and services that Canada is known for. -
The success of this very weak CRTC initiative depends entirely on WHAT channels, in SD or HD, and how many of them will be included in the "Skinny Basic". If content providers will try their usual tactic of "here, have some junk, but for good stuff you will pay more", this will fail spectacularly.
Also, price per channel on top of "Basic" will matter a lot.
Frankly, I have a feeling that usual corporate greed will get the better of the Big Three (plus Cogeco), and we, as consumer, will get the short end of the stick. -
I work for a large provider. The reason future dated information is not made available is because 99% of the people looking at it would fail to notice it is future dated. They'd then call in looking to make changes. When advised those changes couldn't be made until a later date they would then go on a tirade about 'false advertising' or 'deliberate misleading'.
-
I really don't expect much of a break for consumers....the big players will find a way to continue to get their "pound of flesh" as it were. I currently pay over $200 for a Bell Aliant package that also includes home phone and internet.....but a good many of the umpteen channels I get I have zero interest in....
-
This will be a true test of the relevance of the CRTC. Will the TVCos rig the skinny basic or charge crazy fees for the "good" channels? Will the CRTC protect Canadians or corporations?
-
My current TV station line up is great if you're a sports fan but for those of us who prefer to watch programming other than sporting events I for one will welcome a pick-and-pay line up. As long as it is created where you're able to pick what ever stations / channels you prefer and trash the ones you don't watch.
-
-
I have been thinking about cancelling cable for a while. If they introduce individual channels I want for $2-3 each on top of the new skinny bundle then I'll stay. Otherwise this will be my last cable year.
-
-
-
I've never had cable in my adult life. I'm not behind on News or " What's happening". I've also enjoyed living without commercials!
-
Lol..."Cable TV".... How primitive. Do either of the C's stand for "Cretaceous Period?"
-
I haven't bothered with cable since I first discovered high speed internet. Now with legit streaming services like Netflix and Shomi, I can't imagine why anyone would. An internet connection and a pair of rabbit ears is all you need.
That being said, if I can get a basic tv package along with HBO, TSN, Sportsnet, Food Network, HGTV, and the Discovery channel for less than $40 all in, I might just sign up. -
These "skinny" packages don't include the rental fees for digital cable boxes, and they provide the channels available for free by antenna. As a professional antenna installer, I can get 30 channels or more in the Toronto area, and my customers pay no monthly fees. -
I don't know how long I haven't had cable. Right now, I'm getting Canadian channels with an antenna, and everything else is Netflix or Crunchyroll (for my anime-loving daughters) or otherwise online. Canadian cable companies, if you want my business, give me a "skinny" bundle with the main American networks plus TSN and RSN that's not insanely expensive, and we'll talk. -
I have absolutely no desire to have cable, it is a ridiculous cash grab. I have never had cable, I am up to date on all my favorite shows/movies, I get to watch all the hockey/basketball games I want and keep my cash in my jeans. It would have to be VERY appealing cost wise for me to think about cable....considering my internet is 71.00 per month I don't feel like paying much more than that and think that is over-priced as it is.
-
Any thoughts on why cable companies aren't sharing details just yet? This is what Daniel Bader, a columnist with the tech site MobileSyrup.com, told CBC News about the cable companies.
It's a seismic shift that they don't really want people to know about ... if it was in their best interest, they would be advertising it. They have absolutely no incentive to tell people there's a cheaper option.
Earlier, forum commenter Teri said this.I work for a large provider. The reason future dated information is not made available is because 99% of the people looking at it would fail to notice it is future dated. They'd then call in looking to make changes. When advised those changes couldn't be made until a later date they would then go on a tirade about 'false advertising' or 'deliberate misleading'.
What do you think? -
Cable companies say that fees cover local smaller channels so will these channels disappear?
But what does one have to do to get international news these days? Seems to me it used to be the first portion of the regular newscast. Nowadays it's who got shot where, or a terrible storm there. -
-
I did receive some information 5 or 6 weeks ago from Rogers about their new basic package which would be available. Local and US networks only plus a few of the speciality channels which no one wants anyways. Standard (non H.D., non recordable) box only. Pricing went up dramatically for any kind of change (eg: I have an H.D. tv; an H.D. box would be nice......)
They'll have to do better before I'll consider giving up with I currently have. -
It will mean a lot less channels on the dial as the niche ones don't get subscribed to and lose what little funding they currently get and collapse. -
I think I should be able to choose only content I want to support. I
-
As for trying to save Canadian's money, ya right. They have teams of MBA Grads looking at this thing from all angles. Guaranteed that they will re-structure everything so that for most people, to rebuild their current offering will be more expensive, thus keeping them on their current plans. The CRTC doesn't dictate margins, so the TV companies will just price things to steer people the way they want them to go.
-
Folks don't realize how the larger economics of this plan is going to work. The first part of the CRTC's decision, that providers have a basic, cheap and cheerful package option with the key (CBC, Global, CTV, City, and a few American stations) is a sound idea for those who don't need a lot. -
However, pick and pay is going to wreak havoc on prices. Imagine you only paid road tax on the roads you used, school taxes on the classroom your kid used, etc. The system, buoyed by the idea of collectivism through taxation, would collapse.
-
The same holds true for cable packages. By packing channels with channels, this ensures funding for niche market broadcasters whose audience would be too small to fund the station on it's own. Variety will evaporate. And the individual channel costs will increase to compensate. You'll be paying $10 per channel.
-
I'm curious as to what is meant by 'reasonable' in the context of how much providers charge per channel. -
Commenter Drew May brings up a good point. If you didn't get a chance to read the article, here's what the CRTC is forcing the cable companies to offer.
By March 1, TV providers must offer a so-called "skinny" basic package priced at $25 or less. It has to include mandatory local and regional stations, including CBC, CTV and Global as well as public interest Canadian channels such as APTN.
Providers can also add selected U.S. networks like NBC and PBS — but the price can't go up.
Companies must also let customers top up their "skinny" package with pick-and-pay channels. They can offer them either individually or in "reasonably priced" small bundles. Come December, companies must offer both.
-
Pick-and-pay in and by itself means nothing. It will come down to consumer sentiment - will, or will not they get what they want. If yes, i.e. acceptable price for channels that they want, and good, solid quality "skinny basic" - then it might work. If not - people will start cutting cord "en masse", and TV as we know it will end.
-
-
-
-
I think the delay is due to massive number-crunching by the seervice providers to find ways to package attractive channels with others in such a way as to maximize income and profit, and minimize inconvenience for them from a billing perspective.
If they can't lower my price while maintaing the few channels I like, I will work VERY hard at cord-cutting as soon as practical. -
The pick and pay model presents a major challenge for the future of TV. Companies will no longer be able to advertise the value of large packages. People pick what they want, that is it. If there are no large packages and no "savings," how do cable companies present their product? It makes their existence as a 'dumb pipe' even more pronounced.
-
For years I swore that I would never pay for cable--it just wasn't a good deal. But for a buck a day, I'm tempted, especially since it means getting PBS back. (I rent and can't install an antenna). I've gone to Bell and Rogers but have found no information. I'm curious as to what the "real" price will be after taxes, fees, equipment rental and installation. I'm hoping that we consumers can now get a "skinny" package for Internet. I'm willing to pay a buck a day so I can update my computer, read e-mail and visit a few sites. Paying $64 a month through Bell, with no cheaper option, feels like I'm being ripped off. (I don't stream content--if I actually used all of the bandwidth allowed, it would make more sense.) -
They are raising rates per channel, have no info for customers on pick and pay, dragging heels on this.
To Jason, you can buy an indoor HDTV antenna to put in your window to catch signal. -
I am looking forward to the changes. I have not had cable for 10 years. Cannot justify a $100 bill and only watching 10 channels. My hope is that the individual pricing will enable me to get a few channels that I want and ignore the rest. If they do it right, they have a new customer.
-
Want they should is lower Internet and data ,it's a Crime how they go about ripping us off canadain,s are the most expensive country in the world that pays the highest bills.
-
This would have been exciting news fifteen years ago. Not today. The real question is why is the CRTC consistently a decade or more behind the times? I want to read news about cheaper internet and mobile data today, not fifteen years from now. A free over-the-air digital package would be cool too. But this is far too late to make a difference. -
Forum commenter Noah Stewart just said that the CRTC's plan for the cable companies is "far too late to make a difference." We've heard several of the same comments throughout this forum.Thoughts? Do you agree? Disagree?
-
Folks just don't understand government involvement doesn't help. They complained about mobile long distance and mobile plans. What happened was lost of 3 yr plans and higher phone costs monthly and minimum plans of $70. Now they want a la carte TV and the only folks who will gain are people who watch local news and variety -
-
I'd like to see standard definition go extinct. Up charging for HD or requiring customers to pay for SD is just wrong. Doesn't everyone have HD nowadays?
Criminals. -
-
I visited my Shaw cable company office to ask about the changes occurring on March 1st. I was told by staff there they had no details at all. They also said no changes would be occurring in March and it could be as late as December when channel's selection would be available. Shaw can't be complying at all.
-
Our household has been without cable for a year and, surprising to the teenagers, no one is complaining. There are a few things I do miss, but not enough to justify the cost.
If I can get basic channels (CDN and US networks, including TSN) in HD (and no added 'extras'), I might consider reconnecting. If they screw this up, then we know their priorities are purely financial and don't care about being a good Canadian citizen.
Pack them off to Russia, see how they feel then. -
We are going to wrap up this forum in the next few minutes. Any final thoughts, comments, concerns or questions? Post away!
-
I can't wait for this to come into effect! I'm so tired of missing out on sport events because I don't have the "upgraded" package just for TSN2 and SN1.
I'll be cutting all the sports channels immediately and just paying the actual leagues my money for their seasonal online viewing packages. -
My assumption is that the cable companies will figure out a way for customers to be paying about the same having higher prices for the more popular channels based on their dealings with the networks and with both of them figuring out the profit margins of each of their companies.
-
We disconnected completely 1 year ago. Between free over the air antenna television, Roku, and Mygica devices, we are doing quite fine. No interest to connect ever again. Bell and Rogers have dug their own grave for the future of television. Nothing much can save them now, and their "skinny basic package" will be a major disappointment.
-
My question is how on earth the CRTC allows for the increased raise in rates announced by all Canadian providers on internet, home phone cellphone and cable all at once without checking in as a method of price fixing or collusion to stem inevitable losses from cable revenues www.cbc.ca
-
And here's a final thought from forum commenter, pocketjr.
I pay for the NBA league pass and MLB network packages. It's cheaper than paying for the 'upgraded' cable packages just to get the extra channels that might broadcast a game or two. The leagues have to black out local games that are shown on any TSN or SN channels, which sucks, but I'd rather miss a game or maybe go to a game, than give the cable con-artists an extra dime.
-
And that's all the time we have for this forum.Thanks for all your comments, insights and thoughts during today's CBC Forum discussion. The forum format is our new experimental attempt to encourage a different kind of conversation on the site.I'll be rounding up some of your best and most insightful comments and including them in an article which will be posted on CBCNews.ca later today.We'll be back with more forum discussions tomorrow. Have a lovely rest of the day.
