Hacker News Reader

Comment by phkahler | Hacker News Reader

>> Pubs are a favoured target of FACT. Subscriptions allowing them to screen live sports are expensive, making Kodi boxes attractive.

Is this the situation in the US too? I wonder why pubs have shitty cableTV with downgraded picture when they could just get an antenna and have awesome HD. Is it not OK to publicly show that which is broadcast? That seems absurd.

View on HN

Just using an antenna, you would only be able to get a few games, mostly from local teams. People want to see games from all over, which local TV stations don't generally offer.

Sure, but I've seen plenty of businesses that have cable and just show the local news. I can understand a big place wanting to have a variety of sports content, but even those that don't tend to have cable.

Broadcast TV only gets you local sports, or maybe some national-interest stuff (in the US). Cable is required to watch teams from other markets.

Ex. In DC, I'll get the NFL's Redskins on broadcast, plus maybe the Dallas Cowboys and 1-2 others of national interest. If I want to watch the Buffalo Bills every weekend (even when they aren't playing Dallas), I need cable.

It looks pretty cheap in the US actually, not much more than home cable. For example, here's what Comcast offers bars and restaurants:

https://business.comcast.com/tv/restaurants

It looks like they're charging 190 dollars a month for the full sports package. That seems insanely expensive. I don't know how it compares to the UK but with sky you can get their max tier bundle for ~90 pounds a month, and that gives you al their sports and movies channels. (Not that I think it's good value, but certainly better than 190 dollars plus tax!)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com