Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
no, I'd say "the blind hog finds an acorn every now and then" is an appropriate metaphor.
If you don't like it, quit using their service. As noted, there are many many alternatives. Neither paid TV nor even internet are basic necessities.
I like TWC's services but don't like being ripped off by content provider greed and TWC's not fighting for us by threatening to oust the provider if they do not mend their ways.
Thanks for responding. I thought at a price point like $35 per month, surely the content selection must be same as satellite.
The more I look at it, the less interested I am. To get all of the channels I have with Spectrum, they want $70 per month, and that's with no DVR. I would watch very little TV without the ability to record what I want so I can watch when I want. I know they have video on demand, but I very much doubt they have all shows ever created on each channel available, so I'm probably still better off with Spectrum. SlingTV and other options I've looked at just don't cover all the channels we watch.
You and I are in the same boat and I suspect we watch a lot of the same channels. Have you tried using an over the antenna for local channels? Combine that with TiVo which costs around $300 for DVR and you have a fantastic interface. For other channels, you can use Sling or Vue. Alternatively, you can switch to DirectTv and get very competitive rates compared to Spectrum (provided you are okay with signing a two year contract).
Just sent this as a comment to the Federal Communications Commission:
Good luck with that. The cable industry was largely de-regulated during the 1990s. There has been ongoing legal and political controversy about even the most modest variants of must-carry and net neutrality. I can't imagine the FCC would stick their nose into content bundling, especially during the present administration.
Vertical integration is more of a fair trade and antitrust issue, and that's DOJ not the FCC. But I doubt the DOJ is in the mood for this, either.
New bills will now include a "sports surcharge" of about $8 unless you are on a discount plan.
This is disgusting if you, as we and many others, have no interest in sports.
Spectrum says content providers require them to take all offerings or none.
It's time to tell the FCC and Spectrum that content providers need to be reined in. Either FCC should ban this "all or none" marketing or Spectrum should cut off the offending providers.
Sports should be a selectable tier. Those who want it will order it. Others will not pay for an expensive, useless battery of channels.
Sounds like it is time to buy a house and pick the services you want, instead of having to settle for what the landlord arranged for.
You and I are in the same boat and I suspect we watch a lot of the same channels. Have you tried using an over the antenna for local channels? Combine that with TiVo which costs around $300 for DVR and you have a fantastic interface. For other channels, you can use Sling or Vue. Alternatively, you can switch to DirectTv and get very competitive rates compared to Spectrum (provided you are okay with signing a two year contract).
I haven't tried using a local antenna because so far I still have cable. I suppose that will change if I ever decide to cut the cord, but I'm not looking forward to having to switch input modes on the TV to view local channels as a different video source, and because I don't think it would be easy (maybe not even possible) to have an after market recording device switch between sources and resolve any programming conflicts. Without that tight integration between the DVR, the programming guide, and a single input source, I would be giving up so much that I doubt I would watch TV at all anymore. Plus, there are family members that watch channels like TLC and are not willing to give up the ability to watch some of their recurring favorites as they are aired.
I haven't tried using a local antenna because so far I still have cable. I suppose that will change if I ever decide to cut the cord, but I'm not looking forward to having to switch input modes on the TV to view local channels as a different video source, and because I don't think it would be easy (maybe not even possible) to have an after market recording device switch between sources and resolve any programming conflicts. Without that tight integration between the DVR, the programming guide, and a single input source, I would be giving up so much that I doubt I would watch TV at all anymore. Plus, there are family members that watch channels like TLC and are not willing to give up the ability to watch some of their recurring favorites as they are aired.
I have to admit that the convenience, ease of use and reliability of Directv make the cost a little less offensive. 73 year old, technology challenged DH would absolutely agree.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
