Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
What TV Service Do You Use? — Parallax Forums

What TV Service Do You Use?

Duane DegnDuane Degn Posts: 10,588
edited 2013-04-24 14:15 in General Discussion
Conversation at BestBuy today (true story).

Sales Clerk: Have you heard about our "such and such" deal?

Myself: No.

Sales Clerk: It can save you a lot of money on your television service. What television service to you use?

Myself: Broadcast.

Sales Clerk: What's that?

Myself: You know, you use an antenna to pick of the signal coming in over the air.

Sales Clerk: How much does it cost?

Myself: Free.

Sales Clerk: Oh.

The sales clerk then walks off without telling me about their "such and such" (I don't recall the name of the it) deal.

Is there really a generation growing up without the knowledge of broadcast TV?
«1

Comments

  • ercoerco Posts: 20,256
    edited 2013-04-23 20:20
    I canned cable when OTA DTV came out. Hate Time Warner and their $80 cable bills for junk programming. I get tons of free broadcast stations in LA, much more than I can watch. Superb picture quality.
  • lardomlardom Posts: 1,659
    edited 2013-04-23 20:23
    A few years back an acquaintance told me his son asked him "Dad, why do we have a grey TV?"
  • RDL2004RDL2004 Posts: 2,554
    edited 2013-04-23 21:05
    I've been using Comcast for internet service a long time, but not for TV. For some reason, about a year or so ago I began to get price increases for the internet service. I had been paying about $40 a month for a long time, my last bill it was up $16 to almost $75, so I called them.

    It turns out that they have my address set up as a "commercial location" in their system and I was being charged for "Business Class" service, whatever that is. Getting that changed is apparently almost impossible. Two calls a week apart, each lasting over twenty minutes and it still wasn't fixed.

    The third call, I got a little angry. I ended up getting the same exact internet service, with basic TV service, for less than I had been paying for internet alone.

    That's not the end of the story though. I'm still trying to get things straightened out, because on my newest bill I was charged a $20 "installation fee", even though no one came to install anything (I actually had to drive 30 miles to pick up the TV box myself), and I still have a $7 modem lease fee on there, even though I turned the modem in when I picked up the TV box.
  • potatoheadpotatohead Posts: 10,261
    edited 2013-04-23 21:08
    OTA We ditched cable and have been much better for it. I can buy more toys, if I want, and there is more time because streaming and or buying programs is different than just having them there.

    Should have done that way sooner.

    I stream things from various services over a little 4G device that is cheap and fast enough to deliver SD and sometimes higher. I buy movies and watch them full quality when warranted, then swap with friends, and keep a library. Over the years, all the deals add up. I have most any rerun thing I ever want and a lot I have never seen, and that is usually some two-fer or other gimmick. Works for me.

    Truth is there are only one or two programs I watch tops. For a few bucks I buy those and then I'm done.

    I use a PS3, and a computer once in a while. Good enough and easy and I can play SSX from time to time too. :)
  • davejamesdavejames Posts: 4,047
    edited 2013-04-23 22:11
    Duane Degn wrote: »
    Is there really a generation growing up without the knowledge of broadcast TV?


    ...yes.
  • GadgetmanGadgetman Posts: 2,436
    edited 2013-04-23 23:42
    I have basic cable(about a dozen channels), and also broadband (6Mb/s download speed) on that cable, but will hopefully get FTTH(Fibre) with 30+ channels and 25Mb/s up and download speed for less than the cable/broadband costs now.
    There's a $650 install fee and most probably digging work to be done, too.

    Hopefully, as in 'Hopefully at least 60% of the residents in my street orders FTTH so that the service provider starts the install work'
    Also, hopefully, the channel package will include Discovery Science as the 'Discovery Channel' I get now is full of horrid redneck shows.
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2013-04-23 23:43
    One thing I don't get is TV broadcasters charging cable companies to carry their channels. They should be paying the cable companies for increasing viewership for their advertisers. TV programming is not the product, after all: it's just bait. And we viewers are not the customers: we're actually the product. Our viewership is what's sold to the real customers, i.e. the advertisers.

    -Phil
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2013-04-24 00:01
    Phil,
    And we viewers are not the customers: we're actually the product.
    I have been hearing this idea a lot in recent years. Normally in discussions about the business models of Google and advertising on the net. I have come to the conclusion that it is not true.

    Looked at from a purely monetary point of view it might look like viewers are not customers as they don't pay anything. But viewers do pay a price, they pay with their time, they pay with their attention, their minds, their very soul. Eventually, of course, the idea is that they make it to the store or online purchase and pay with their hard earned cash to buy whatever Smile was advertised.

    Viewers pay a very high price and have every right to be "customers".

    In answer to the posters question: None.

    There is no TV in this house. I have never bought a TV in my life. "Her indoors" manages to get all the shows she wants to watch over the net (legitimately I might add) and is happy to watch on a PC or laptop. We can have cable here, I was surprised when she decided she was not going to subscribe anymore, "Too much advertising" she said. See what I mean, the customer decided that price was too high.
  • WBA ConsultingWBA Consulting Posts: 2,934
    edited 2013-04-24 00:05
    OTA via a dual tuner network device piped into my media pc running win7 ultimate. DVR any shows we watch and very rarely watch live TV or commercials (except superbowl). Haven't paid for channels for about 8 years.

    And yes, people do ask me what it means when I say we have an attic antenna for OTA DTV. Sad......
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2013-04-24 00:17
    heater wrote:
    Viewers pay a very high price and have every right to be "customers".
    You can't catch good fish with bad bait. We do have a right to be picky about what programming hooks our attention, But in the end, we're just fish dangling from that baited hook, ready to be put on ice and delivered to the admen.

    -Phil
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2013-04-24 00:39
    Phil,
    But in the end, we're just fish dangling from that baited hook, ready to be put on ice and delivered to the admen.
    Boy that's a depressing and defeatest view of the situation.

    We do have a choice you know.

    Mind you I never actually made the choice. I just sort of forgot all about TV after I left home in 1975. Life at Uni for four years was far too busy to think about such things.

    From time to time I have sat and watched telly with people and very soon start to wonder how they can put up with it.
  • ajwardajward Posts: 1,130
    edited 2013-04-24 00:41
    We have Comcast and it's not too bad... my roommate picks up the cost on this.

    One of my pet peeves is the AT&T commercials touting the "miracle" of wireless teevee. Jeez, remember these:
    TV-rabbit-ears.jpg
    TV-rabbit-ears.jpg
    300 x 300 - 52K
  • ajwardajward Posts: 1,130
    edited 2013-04-24 00:44
    Heater. wrote: »
    "Too much advertising" she said. See what I mean, the customer decided that price was too high.

    I know what she means. Sometimes there have been so many commercials, I've forgotten what I was watching. (And no! It's not entirely senility! :-> )

    @
  • LoopyBytelooseLoopyByteloose Posts: 12,537
    edited 2013-04-24 02:04
    Personally I am adverse to monthly billings and automatic renewals for anything but the necessities - rent, water, electric, basic telephone, ADSL, and minimal cell service.

    Cable TV, health clubs, book of the month clubs, and so on depend on you losing control of your budget. Any overly aggressive, overly presumptive business model tends to send me into pondering ways to do completely without the service.

    These days I do use a cable TV service, but it is provided by the landlady and included in the rent.

    I am a bit curious if Netflix is doing well in the USA and Europe.
  • Martin_HMartin_H Posts: 4,051
    edited 2013-04-24 03:47
    OTA, Netflix streaming, and YouTube. We don't have cable and my kids complain about it. But I point out to them that Netflix has enough content to occupy their time. YouTube is great for odd ball stuff and some content providers (e.g. PBS) publish content to it.
  • mindrobotsmindrobots Posts: 6,506
    edited 2013-04-24 04:45
    We had DirecTV(not a BIG package) for almost 18 years, watched it less and less and found less to watch that we couldn't get other places.

    Now: OTA, Netflix & Amazon Prime through Roku boxes, streaming from the networks for any thing current. We have more than enough to watch! Plus for one month's cable/satellite bill, we get Amazon Prime benefits for an entire year!
  • lardomlardom Posts: 1,659
    edited 2013-04-24 07:14
    @Phil Pilgrim, suscribers, broadcasters and advertisers all pay the cable company. If not for the phone and satellite companies they would have complete regional monopolies.
  • Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi)Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) Posts: 23,514
    edited 2013-04-24 08:12
    lardom wrote:
    ... suscribers, broadcasters and advertisers all pay the cable company.
    Not around here they don't. I pay a surcharge on my cable bill to offset what the cable company pays the Seattle TV stations to carry their programming. And I'm quite sure the cable company receives no revenue from the broadcaster's advertisers.

    -Phil
  • ctwardellctwardell Posts: 1,716
    edited 2013-04-24 08:17
    Killed the cable about two years ago, just get broadcast now.

    C.W.
  • ratronicratronic Posts: 1,451
    edited 2013-04-24 08:33
    I use BrightHouse Networrks cable for home phone, cable tv, and internet. When my current deal with BrightHouse runs out I will switch all of those services back to AT&T. AT&T have been sending me letters offering me a year's special deal to get my business back. As far as internet connection speed the cable company has faster rates (up to 60mbs).
  • lardomlardom Posts: 1,659
    edited 2013-04-24 08:52
    @Phil Pilgrim, Some years back Cable Vision and the NY Yankees clashed over surcharges to subscribers for the Yankees new YES Channel. Satellite did very well during that period because Yankee fans wanted to see baseball.
    I think you're right now that I'm looking at what I wrote! I couldn't imagine a situation where the cable company would charge broadcaster's advertisers but I have recently seen promotions aimed directly at local advertisers. Monthly rates have shot up rather quickly.
    I strongly believe that that the cable company has morphed into a monster since they became the major player in the communications industry and I wouldn't be surprised if they were working on ways to generate new revenue streams from everyone else.
  • tonyp12tonyp12 Posts: 1,951
    edited 2013-04-24 09:56
    Was able to get comcast-internet by itself for around $30/month for over a year, still got some basic channels for free.
    When the price went up to $54 and called and got blast-plus for $29.95
    30mbps internet + and 50 channels+ one 480i cablebox included for 6months.

    When price goes up, time to call and negotiate down or put the service in a different name to count as a new customer.
  • Duane DegnDuane Degn Posts: 10,588
    edited 2013-04-24 10:26
    Hey guys (and gal), thanks for all the replies. I should have made my original post (or better yet the title of the thread) more clear.

    I just want to share my amazement at the sales clerks lack of knowledge of what broadcast TV was. Thanks to some of your replies I see this isn't a unique event.

    I used the question the sales clerk's asked me as a title of this thread. I probably should have titled it "The Youth of the World Today are Ignorant of Basic Things Like Broadcast TV."

    While I wasn't really after what TV services you all used, I certainly don't mind having the information shared here. Feel free to continue to do so. (You of course don't need my permission to post about whatever you'd like.)

    It's been fun reading what you all have had to say.

    Thanks,
  • mindrobotsmindrobots Posts: 6,506
    edited 2013-04-24 11:13
    Well, in response to your original topic :smile:,

    I (being a wizened 53) often amuse myself by the things I say to my daughter (all of 11) that should really mean little to her as far as things she might have ever experienced. Things we did as kids that make no sense to kids today (and vice versa).
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2013-04-24 11:30
    Duane Degn,

    In my experience sales clerks never know anything about anything. Let's face it, if they did they would be doing something else.

    Back in the day you would have a butchers shop and you would expect it's owner to know something about meat. The fish monger would know something about fish. The guy with the TV/Radio store would know something about, well, TVs and radios. Those guys owned their stores and their business depended on them knowing what is what.

    Today we have huge mega-stores and chains and malls, no one working there has a personal stake in what's going on. Why would they feel the need to know anything about anything.

    Anyway, as a 50 something years old guy it hits me, for example, that the youngsters have no idea what an LP is:)
  • BeanBean Posts: 8,129
    edited 2013-04-24 11:45
    Phil Pilgrim (PhiPi) wrote: »
    One thing I don't get is TV broadcasters charging cable companies to carry their channels. They should be paying the cable companies for increasing viewership for their advertisers. TV programming is not the product, after all: it's just bait. And we viewers are not the customers: we're actually the product. Our viewership is what's sold to the real customers, i.e. the advertisers.
    -Phil

    Phil, A guy at work was telling about how much he had to pay for his son to be in a motorcycle race. Then he asks me if I would want to come see his son race. I said "If I'm not doing anything else, maybe I'll come over to see him".
    Then he tells me "Well it's $20 to watch the race." And I was like WHAT??? You are paying the track to race, then I have to pay the track to watch the race ?

    So he is paying to be the product that I as the customer am paying for... When I asked him if that didn't seem wrong, he didn't really follow what I was saying (or he didn't want to admit it).

    Bean
  • Duane DegnDuane Degn Posts: 10,588
    edited 2013-04-24 11:51
    Heater. wrote: »
    In my experience sales clerks never know anything about anything. Let's face it, if they did they would be doing something else.

    Unfortunately I think you're correct (though I might amend the "never" and "anything" to "very rarely" and "most things").

    I've grown used to clerks selling electronics not to know much about what they are selling. It was the complete look of bafflement the clerk had about a free TV service that was available with an antenna that really surprised me. I was also (pleasantly) surprised how it completely stopped him off from trying to sell me their TV service.

    I turn 50 in less than a week. I guess it's about time for me to start complaining about the younger generation.
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2013-04-24 12:05
    Duange,

    Yes but I first noticed this total ignorance of sales clerks back in the late 1970s.

    It's possible that I was born as an old curmudgeon:)
  • mindrobotsmindrobots Posts: 6,506
    edited 2013-04-24 12:10
    Heater. wrote: »
    It's possible that I was born as an old curmudgeon:)

    We can have a club! :smile:
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,256
    edited 2013-04-24 13:33
    Duane Degn wrote: »
    I turn 50 in less than a week.

    @ Publison: You gettin' this? :)

    @Duane: So you've been enjoying the AARP mailings this year, huh?

    http://atom.smasher.org/construction/?l1=duane+&l2=degn&l3=old+fart&l4=soon%21
Sign In or Register to comment.