inignoct wrote:

] I think we're about 3 weeks away from cancelling our cable
] altogether, acquiring by broadcast the network stations that
] account for 80% of our viewing (and pretty much all of the
] shows we watch on purpose, none of the
] hm-lets-see-whats-on-while-i-eat-lunch type shows). 70 bucks
] a month for cable just isn't worth it. If i could buy the
] networks, UPN, and FoodTV, maybe cartoon network for 20-25,
] that'd be much more compelling.
]
] While I'm dreaming, I'd also like to be able to pay-per-view
] any football game... they have cameras at all of them... I
] should get to choose what game to watch. -k]

I say we just skip over the a la carte pricing model, which is doomed to be drug through the FCC for the next year and well into the next presidential term, and go for putting all this content on an open network, like the Internet. There's no reason why I should have to pay an arbitrary aggregator like a cable co to receive content that I can access directly from the source. If the cable co wants to remain relevant, they can price transmission across their network accordingly, or bundle these streams for me based upon demographic data. But for God's sake, get out of the way of progress already!!!

RE: Duluth News Tribune | 03/28/2004 | Cable industry defends packaging