Cable TV price increases have beaten inflation every single year for 20 years

[boutons_deux]

http://www.businessinsider.com/cable-tv-prices-inflation-chart-2016-10?r=UK&IR=T

BigCorp screws us all, because they can.

[Wild Cobra]

So?

Have a breakdown of the costs, or are you just trolling again?

[Wild Cobra]

Tell me.

How much did a T3 data speeds cost in 1996?

Now it's available in most homes for under $80/mo.

[ElNono]

Tell me.

How much did a T3 data speeds cost in 1996?

Now it's available in most homes for under $80/mo.

That's actually the exact opposite of the OP... tech prices have largely gone down, but the opposite has been reflected in prices towards consumers.

[Wild Cobra]

How many channels did cable service have in 1996 vs. 2016?

How about the change from 480i to 1080p quality?

Did "on demand" exist in 1996?

[ElNono]

This is a complex topic, about carrier fees, channel bundling, broken promises, etc.

But technology is reshaping this a bit, despite the IP cartel's major efforts to keep the cash cow going.

[ElNono]

How many channels did cable service have in 1996 vs. 2016?

How about the change from 480i to 1080p quality?

Did "on demand" exist in 1996?

Well, didn't cable promise "commercial free" TV back in the 80s? what happened? Costs of any and all those equipment have largely gone down. Don't you agree a $5/mo cable box fee or a $10/mo DVR fee is a ripoff?

[Wild Cobra]

That's actually the exact opposite of the OP... tech prices have largely gone down, but the opposite has been reflected in prices towards consumers.

Yes, I know. However, they have to keep spending money on more and more fiber lines.

As the population increases and personal data demand increase, the carrier capabilities have to keep up. This is an expensive task.

Now if we kept with 1996 demand, I would expect prices to drop.

I had an argument with a coworker not long ago about Comcast. Ever see what their profit per share is and taxes they pay per share, vs. thew price per share? They cannot keep expanding their service and capacity if they reduce their pricing to the point of operating in the red.

People like to just look at the gross revenues, without taking into consideration the costs of achieving those revenues.

Since B-Shit started this thread, I know where his mind is at in all this.

[DMX7]

Content has also grown a lot.

[Wild Cobra]

Well, didn't cable promise "commercial free" TV back in the 80s? what happened? Costs of any and all those equipment have largely gone down. Don't you agree a $5/mo cable box fee or a $10/mo DVR fee is a ripoff?
I don't remember them promising commercial free from the sitting broadcasters. Just things like movies. You know, showtime, HBO, etc.

My Motorola modem cost me something like $60 or $70 when I bought it some years back. It saved me $5/mo at the time. I had dropped cable TV service because I don't watch it enough to pay those ridiculous rates. Comcast just raised my internet service from $69.95 to $73.95. The year before, it was $64.95. $9 in two years. However, my data speeds went from under 30 mbs, to over 60 mbs at the same time.

I don't like the pricing, but I understand it. Especially since I first started working with DS0 to DS3 data rates in the 80's.

It is amazing and very costly, to run all that fiber, to give people the speeds and number of channel choices today.

If people don't like the pricing... drop your service.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't the current TV's have the ability of interfacing with store bought box so you pay a one time charge? I don't know because most the people I know have dropped cable TV preferring Hula, Amazon, Netflix, etc.

Hulu and Netflix are great on my 1440P monitor!

[ElNono]

The only reason they went into data is because the writing was on the wall. And frankly, even there, the US pays exorbitant amounts of money for pretty shitty internet access compared to the rest of the world. Not to mention that in most areas (and a lot of metropolitan areas too), cableco has a monopoly or duopoly. They're fighting Google fiber tooth and nail to access poles (http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/10/att-falsely-claimed-pro-google-fiber-rule-is-invalid-fcc-says/). They're fighting the FCC over standarizing cable boxes. They probably spend more money on lobby than infrastructure. On top of that, they're consolidating.... now AT&T is buying up TWC...

[ElNono]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't the current TV's have the ability of interfacing with store bought box so you pay a one time charge? I don't know because most the people I know have dropped cable TV preferring Hula, Amazon, Netflix, etc.

Hulu and Netflix are great on my 1440P monitor!

They're still forcing cableco's hands on that (http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/09/fcc-changes-cable-box-rules-to-please-industry-gets-blowback-anyway/). It's obvious they want to keep charging those ridiculous fees.

But cable-cutting will continue, and things like Sling TV or PS Vue will clean up a lot of that, IMO. IPTV is really finally here.

They're fighting like the recording companies did when a CD was $20 and you had to buy the whole thing, not $1 a song. But it's not going to last, IMO.

[Wild Cobra]

There are various reasons why data is more expensive than other countries. One of which is population density. Now I don't know what other governments taxes data providers, but Comcast paid almost $5 billion in taxes last year allowing the stock holders a little over $8 billion in profits, before they have to pay any capital gains!

2.4 billion shares, $62/share...

What is that?

Around a 5% annual return for the investors. Is that excessive?

[SnakeBoy]

:cryMy entertainment is too expensive:cry

God Bless Murica!

[ElNono]

There are various reasons why data is more expensive than other countries. One of which is population density. Now I don't know what other governments taxes data providers, but Comcast paid almost $5 billion in taxes last year allowing the stock holders a little over $8 billion in profits, before they have to pay any capital gains!

2.4 billion shares, $62/share...

What is that?

Around a 5% annual return for the investors. Is that excessive?

That's pretty good when you have an inflation of about 2% and the economic growth is circa 2%... but it's the wrong question, IMO. Was that return in better services, technological innovations, cost cutting, or simple rate hikes? That kind of stuff matters (or used to matter, today's market is such a short-term gamble machine though).

And when you actually look at the nickel and dimming, and the renowned poor customer service, you kinda get the idea...

But it's ok, they can milk whatever they have left on that business, I just have a problem when they get in the way of competition. Especially when they're virtual monopolies in a lot of places.

[ElNono]

:cryMy entertainment is too expensive:cry

God Bless Murica!

First world problems, tbh

[Wild Cobra]

They're still forcing cableco's hands on that (http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/09/fcc-changes-cable-box-rules-to-please-industry-gets-blowback-anyway/). It's obvious they want to keep charging those ridiculous fees.

But cable-cutting will continue, and things like Sling TV or PS Vue will clean up a lot of that, IMO. IPTV is really finally here.

They're fighting like the recording companies did when a CD was $20 and you had to buy the whole thing, not $1 a song. But it's not going to last, IMO.

Wasn't there also something about the Horse Whip sales when cars came around?

[ElNono]

Wasn't there also something about the Horse Whip sales when cars came around?

I'm not that old, tbh

[Big Empty]

Whats new with cable? I have basic cable & internet paying 170. Im gonna have to keep my internet but are there any cable apps out there that u can see spurs & cowboys games on? Local channels?

[Thread]

The only thing cable is good for is CNN & TCM. That's it. And now TCM is losing money hand over fist because they WOKE.