Hacker News Reader

Comment by paul9290 | Hacker News Reader

Sounds better then having to pay $70 a month for cable TV. When I had cable TV I never watched the majority of the channels they pushed on me.

View on HN

And yet the $70 a month you spent was funding shows like Mad Men. Advertising is such a small part of revenues but since it's the only side the consumer sees (well, DVD sales) we see these things as game changers. The real problem to solve here is that of affiliate fees[1]. Without cable fees it's a pretty safe bet that quality programming like Mad Men wouldn't be around. Maybe we're moving that way anyway where all that's available are cheap web series, but it'd be a bummer in my opinion.

[1]http://abovethecrowd.com/2010/04/28/affiliate-fees-make-the-...

Well I pay $10 or more to go see a quality movie. I make the choice to go out, choose the movie I want to see and pay the cost. Cable TV does not offer me this and as like Blockbuster being killed by Netflix(crazy late fees consumers hated), such will be the downfall to their locked in shackles business model consumers loathe.

Quality programs can still be made and just like movies consumers will pay to watch them. Also look at the DVD market it was huge; ppl payed 15 bucks per DVD.

Sounds like you have a personal investment and or making your money off the cable pig that needs to be slayed. If your here reading HN then think out of the box to increase ur profit and solve the problem of the cable pig!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com