Why am I stuck with one cable provider in 2006?

[agrundman]

It is the year 2006, isn't it?  Why am I stuck with only one choice for cable television?  I am so fed up with TWC's stance of not adding new HD stations.  I am free to choose multiple phone companies.  Why can't I have a choice of multiple cable providers?  I'd choose satellite but for the fact that their lineups aren't an improvement over TWC and due to hardware cost and hassle of installation.

I'd love to get Comcast cable.  Their HD lineup is better than any other provider in the business, Cable or Satellite.  They carry Starz, Cinemax, UPN, WB, and NFL Network all in HD.  However, it doesn't look like they carry HD Net.

It would be nice to have the choice.  This would at least create an incentive for lazy cable companies like TWC to get off their rears and add all of the HD channels that are out there.  There is just no excuse anymore; this is America.

[mrmike]

Because TWC can afford legislators, and you can't.

[Sparkman87]

It is the year 2006, isn't it?  Why am I stuck with only one choice for cable television?  I am so fed up with TWC's stance of not adding new HD stations.  I am free to choose multiple phone companies.  Why can't I have a choice of multiple cable providers?  I'd choose satellite but for the fact that their lineups aren't an improvement over TWC and due to hardware cost and hassle of installation.

I'd love to get Comcast cable.  Their HD lineup is better than any other provider in the business, Cable or Satellite.  They carry Starz, Cinemax, UPN, WB, and NFL Network all in HD.  However, it doesn't look like they carry HD Net.

It would be nice to have the choice.  This would at least create an incentive for lazy cable companies like TWC to get off their rears and add all of the HD channels that are out there.  There is just no excuse anymore; this is America.

For the same reason you only have 1 choice for telephone service, electric , natural gas etc.  The costs to come in & wire a city are too much if you not assured a monopoly.

[gparris]

Quote: "For the same reason you only have 1 choice for telephone service, electric , natural gas etc. The costs to come in & wire a city are too much if you not assured a monopoly."

Not necessarily.

When I visit Florida, Verizon FIOs has a decent service offering and they DID run optical fiber around a good many homes, directly to houses, not the fiber-coax we have here (which is still good, but not as expensive).
It competes with Brighthouse Networks which is now squirming to add more HD channels, faster internet, etc. (TWC: its called competition).

It just depends on the community cooperation and cost effectiveness of running this type of system.
Addtionally, WOW in Chicagoland competes with Comcast and does a decent job of it, too (seen it).

[agrundman]

For the same reason you only have 1 choice for telephone service, electric , natural gas etc.  The costs to come in & wire a city are too much if you not assured a monopoly.

I agree with you regarding electric and gas service.  However, you are wrong regarding telephone service.  I have numerous choices for telephone service.  I don't understand why cable can't be offered in a form similar to telephone service.  I'm guessing that it would require competing cable companies to compensate TWC for use of their hardware.  It just doesn't make sense that we're subject to a monopoly on these services.  It has clearly affected the actions of TWC and their complete dis-incentive to add additional offerings.  I just wish satellite would improve their offerings, as this seems to be the only competition for the cable companies.

[Gregg Lengling]

Okay you may have only one cable provider available...but hold on ......here it comes........the Telcos are starting to install more and more fiber and soon you may have fiber to the home and they will be offering you TV products.....

Just a reverse of the Cable Cos now offering Telephone, soon Telephone will offer cable.  

Just do an Internet Search on the subject and you'll be overwhelmed.

[agrundman]

Okay you may have only one cable provider available...but hold on ......here it comes........the Telcos are starting to install more and more fiber and soon you may have fiber to the home and they will be offering you TV products.....

Just a reverse of the Cable Cos now offering Telephone, soon Telephone will offer cable.  

Just do an Internet Search on the subject and you'll be overwhelmed.

That would be awesome.  Nothing like a little competition to improve service.  It would be quite ironic to see telecoms turning the tables on the cable companies.

[gparris]

That would be awesome.  Nothing like a little competition to improve service.  It would be quite ironic to see telecoms turning the tables on the cable companies.

That is what I was trying to convey with Verizon FIOS.
Once just a telephone provider, now a lot more!
See:http://www22.verizon.com/FiosForHome/Channels/FiosTV/hdtv.aspx

[tencom]

Why offer more HDTV when so few are taking  the HDTV package. I heard its only between two or three thousand I believe that cable couldn't survive,  in a too competive  situation, because they need a high pentration rate,  to survive, to replace or built another cable system  to cover the Milwaukee metro area is estimated to cost  over $300 million  several years ago a company called DIGITAL ACCESS attempted to raise that amount of money, and failed, and as FIO service is concerned there are no plans that I heard, of for a large scale roll out for fiber to the home,  as the cost are still to high. I believe the  SBC plans are only to bring fiber to the neighborhood with a telephone connection to the home with a bandwidth of about 8 megabits

[gparris]

tencom: Telecoms do not disclose their actual numbers for competitive reasons and SBC (now AT&T) along with Verizon, are not small like the company you mentioned.  

More services are available now due to technology upgrades than ever before that company tried tackling it, so the stakes are higher.

As far as HD package takers, many subscribers do not know about it due to poor training of the TWC CSRS-many do not know about it or understand it:
I "test" them along with several HDTV friends of mine (I know its not accurate), but even then, some subs balk at having to take the digital access thing at additional cost just to get the HD pak.
With other cable systems, like Comcast south of me, there is no HD pak adder.

[milwaukeebear]

i only have one choice for local land line telephone service--verizon, and they make me pay through the nose for it. my bill here is triple what it was in chicago, where you had several choices. for long distance, we can choose anyone, and wouldn't you know it, verizon's long-distance is very competitively priced.
i still don't trust voip. i work in a pediatric ER and have seen a bad outcome of someone that had a delay in care because of substandard 911 service through a voip. i know things are improving, but when a life is on the line and every second counts, i don't care if i save 10 bucks a month.

[picopir8]

Where are you at?  If you are anywhere in the milwaukee metro area then you should be able to get service through TDS.  I had them and was very pleased.  However, then I switched to cable and now have sunrocket for my phone.  $16.66/mo (taxes included) for unlimited local and long distance, two phone numbers, caller id/call waiting/3-way/voicemail/etc, and about an hours worth of international calling.  And they sent me free cordless phones. Land line phone cant come close to that so I probably wont go back anytime in the forseable future.

[tencom]

tencom: Telecoms do not disclose their actual numbers for competitive reasons and SBC (now AT&T) along with Verizon, are not small like the company you mentioned.  

More services are available now due to technology upgrades than ever before that company tried tackling it, so the stakes are higher.

As far as HD package takers, many subscribers do not know about it due to poor training of the TWC CSRS-many do not know about it or understand it:
I "test" them along with several HDTV friends of mine (I know its not accurate), but even then, some subs balk at having to take the digital access thing at additional cost just to get the HD pak.
With other cable systems, like Comcast south of me, there is no HD pak adder.

 I am sure that the the percentage of homes who  Have HDTV is very low last figures I saw for the nation was only 4% . Also I believe the broadcasters Might go to multcasting and drop HDTV,  and offering  cable TV  channels instead. FOX TV6. and HEARST ch.12 invested in a company that is  planning to use  the extra TV channels that DTV can provide for such a purpose maybe the real threat to cable will come from the OTA broadcasters. There is no requirement by conqress or the FCC that it has to be  HDTV all it requires is DTV. I believe that the government should have mandated HDTV.  I just hope that HDTV owners, aren't left high and dry. Broadcasters will propably put ther economic interests first. and
    You are right to say that TWC personal are poorly trained, many of there technical people, don't know what a cable node is.

[gparris]

tencom:

Welcome to the forum, but may I ask :

Do you actually HAVE an HDTV? :confused:
You seem very negative towards HDTV (as it sounds from your last message to me) and reading other forums, those that don't have can be pessimistic.

Your figure of 4% (for HDTV homes) is very low
...was this a guess on your part? :confused:

[tencom]

tencom:

Welcome to the forum, but may I ask :

Do you actually HAVE an HDTV? :confused:
You seem very negative towards HDTV (as it sounds from your last message to me) and reading other forums, those that don't have can be pessimistic.

Your figure of 4% (for HDTV homes) is very low
...was this a guess on your part? :confused:

Figures were from Jan 2005, and the TV rating firm A. C. neilson said they don't consider HDTV  households in their rating samples because of low numbers.  .
      I have installed in my computer an DVICO FUSION HDTV tuner that cost only $100.00  just to sample HDTV.  I won't make a large investment, until the future of HDTV is assured.  I'm mostly only interested in the technical aspects of the technologies  that are involved and not an avid television viewer