It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

watching tv-- it should be free

page: 3
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Dilligaf28
 


Unless you live on the side of a hill like me, depending on what time of year I can receive all my locals, just never all at the same time lol. So the bundle plan for internet cable and phone works pretty good for me.




posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by calstorm
 


The only advantage we have now days is the dvr's , or free programs such as Linux MCE where you can essentially make your own dvr and skip through all the commercials.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 10:09 PM
link   
TV in the UK used to be of a high standard with quality documentaries , comedy and drama but it is nothing more than dumbed down mass media propaganda designed to keep our increasingly brain dead population from thinking for themselves or challenging the status quo..

I agree 100 percent with the OP , TV should be free but if it went off the air permanently I honestly wouldn't miss it one little bit.

Flagged and stars for thread.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by TLomon
This is the part I am confused on....

1) Company spends money building up a physical network (headends, fiber, coax, etc.)
2) Company spends money installing necessary equipment at customer houses.
3) Company pays fees to source providers for the right to broadcast channels and shows.
4) Company now gives away its product for free?

The first three points are reality. The last one is what the OP is suggesting. How exactly should TV be free with those costs incurred? Remember, these are private companies.

You obviously don't remember a time all T.V. came from an antenna on the roof.with no monthly fees. advertiserspaid networks( bought advertising air time :aka"commercials") to be able to showyou their crap for sale in your living room.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 10:28 PM
link   
Perhaps it is not a reasonable proposition for TV to be free at all.

It would make more sense as an economic proposition if people are going to spend their lives in front of the idiot box that they should be compensated for that - i.e. paid by the hour.

TV may be a product, but it is an economic bad not an economic good. Anyone paying for TV is a sad case indeed.



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by brindle
Talk about the best con of all time.Tv reception used to be free,then our elected officials in conjunction with our networks realized they could soak the public for big money under the guise of cable tv.After seeing how successful that easy scam was, charlie said to harry,lets take it one more level,yea thats it,i got it now,we will call it pay per view.Now in addition to a regular monthly bill,we will put things we know people really want to watch on pay per view.We have them by the balls.If you dont think there are meetings being run around the clock on how to take it to even another level of billing,call me about the property for sale in hillbilly kentucky,we can strike a deal.


First, you should dump TV. Get rid of it. it is nothing but brain melting junk. I use it for background noise in my house. the only reason i have it is because without it, i have no wife.


But to address your supposition...in a previous career I was an operations manager for Time Warner Cable of New York City. I can guarantee you that there are rooms with people sitting around trying to figure out how to get more of your money into their pocket.

With TWCNYC you have a major city market in the worlds financial capital. For many of their customers (especially in Manhattan and Mt Vernon markets), it isn't about money. It is about return on investment. So we hammered it into agents heads to approach all sales positions from the perspective of value, not cost. Never mention the cost until asked. Instead, talk about the value recieved.

I have sat in such meetings. I used to know the lady in charge of sales for all TWCNYC markets. Great lady. Dunkin Donuts coffee addict.



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 12:25 AM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Any sales position you are supposed to sell the value off things and not the price. Not just cable.

People don't like to be sold, but they love to buy things.



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 12:28 AM
link   
reply to post by lagenese
 


And there's no mind programming going on on the internet?

Just a thought...



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by whoshotJR
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Any sales position you are supposed to sell the value off things and not the price. Not just cable.

People don't like to be sold, but they love to buy things.


Yeah, that is true.

The way it was taught in TWC was different than what I had seen. Possibly due to it being an East Coast operation (we are far more laid back out here in the West).



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 02:22 AM
link   
reply to post by NWOnoworldorder
I feel for you, I can't understand how they can actually force people to buy a license for their TV? What puzzlement... A license to hunt, a license to own a gun, a license to drive a license to practice medicine...

A license to own a TV! To own a TV!

Stop the world! I want off!



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 02:53 AM
link   
reply to post by TLomon
 




This is the part I am confused on....

1) Company spends money building up a physical network (headends, fiber, coax, etc.)
2) Company spends money installing necessary equipment at customer houses.
3) Company pays fees to source providers for the right to broadcast channels and shows.
4) Company now gives away its product for free?

The first three points are reality. The last one is what the OP is suggesting. How exactly should TV be free with those costs incurred? Remember, these are private companies.

Well, in Australia we have a thing called "free to air TV" - or something like that, they earn all their profit from advertisement and it's completely free to tune in and watch (we don't need radio/TV license or some other BS either). They transmit via stations located around the country, so it's basically a free local television service, but I don't get any signal out where I live. Cable & Satellite TV was supposed to offer a premium service without adverts and loads more channels and shows you can't get on "normal TV", in this case profit is generated by paying customers. It achieves that to a degree, but the adverts are becoming longer and longer all the time, and satellite TV is my only option out where I live.

edit on 30-12-2010 by WhizPhiz because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join