Cable carrier sees drop in users

[Jack 1000]

I was listening to an online show that said the loss of 83,000 subscribers was based on a national average.  The host said that TWC has about 1.6 million subscribers nationwide and according to what he said most of the loses came from the LA area and Texas.  He thinks that it is mostly due to better HD choices with Dish and not so much The Big 10 Network.  But I think it is both of these issues.  Big 10 Network should be offered to all cable systems and at a fair price. (and I am not even a sports fan!)  But considering what people are paying for cable, they need to stop the negotiating "B.S" and make a deal so that the customers can be happy with the service.

Jack

[Dan the Man]

Plain and simple - HD content. BTN and NFL networks - secondary, but a definate plus. Oh - and CUSTOMER SERVICE.

When I dropped my boxes off at TWC in Mayfair mall last week, there were quite a few people dropping off equipment. 2 women behind me where talking and the one asked the other "I wonder why so many are here to drop off boxes?" I just had to laugh.

When I said I wanted to cancel the TV portion of my service, the customer rep never even asked me why. I guess the answer was obvious. Keep RR but ditch the cable TV, there is only one reason why.

For all those who will never get anything other then TWC, I hope for their sake that TWC wakes up and smells the roses, before they jack rates up through the roof to keep making money.

[Tom Snyder]

Not sure if the new legislation will allow it, but it would be great if other cable providers could someday use TWC's wires and provide the programming... kinda like what happened when Ameritech was forced to allow other carriers to sell service over their infrastructure.

[gparris]

Plain and simple - HD content. BTN and NFL networks - secondary, but a definate plus. Oh - and CUSTOMER SERVICE.

When I dropped my boxes off at TWC in Mayfair mall last week, there were quite a few people dropping off equipment. 2 women behind me where talking and the one asked the other "I wonder why so many are here to drop off boxes?" I just had to laugh.

When I said I wanted to cancel the TV portion of my service, the customer rep never even asked me why. I guess the answer was obvious. Keep RR but ditch the cable TV, there is only one reason why.

For all those who will never get anything other then TWC, I hope for their sake that TWC wakes up and smells the roses, before they jack rates up through the roof to keep making money.

While I'm not a big sports fan, I do understand the need for having BTN and NFL channels, both in HD (where these shine) for many subscribers.
If the alternative pay TV services offer them, why not local cable, right?
But HD channels, or the lack of them against competing providers is also key to these returned boxes, too, as consumers begin to "wake up" and get educated about HDTV.

As for us continuing subscribers with TWC:
It's great to complain about their lack of local interest in providing at least all of the currently "available" HD channels TWC can contractually offer, at least what is happening in other TWC locales.
-That's about all we can do unless we find a way to switch like those others did.
We, afterall, pay a good amount of money for cableTV service, so we are in our right to complain, especially if the cable rates are approx. the same as other TWC areas that get more HD channels than we do here in Wisconsin.
For example:
It would be like going shopping at different stores of the same name, the total at the cable "register" is the same, but your "bag" has twelve fewer items in it than the person shopping with the same items as you did at the same name store.
Wouldn't you feel sort of "cheated" that you have fewer items in your "bag", yet you got charged the same?
-Darn right you would!
So that is the "TWC equivalent" of what is happening here in with TWC HD Wisconsin subscribers.
Fewer HD channels than other areas of the country for the same cable "register receipt".

Now, not all of us can run to another provider if a tree is the way, or satellite equipment leasing fees are required, but many do.
Others have found ways around it (or have no trees and a perfect line-of-sight) - or have U-Verse available.

Whether or not TWC decides to do delivery on those "10+ HD channels" this year is anyone's guess.
But since TWC is so far behind the other competing subscriber services:
- it would very wise on their part locally, to carry whatever HD channels are offered by TWC nationally, now.

It will be "nice", but not great, to get those two new HD channels on the 14th.

[Mags]

While I'm not a big sports fan, I do understand the need for having BTN and NFL channels, both in HD (where these shine) for many subscribers.
If the alternative pay TV services offer them, why not local cable, right?
But HD channels, or the lack of them against competing providers is also key to these returned boxes, too, as consumers begin to "wake up" and get educated about HDTV.

As for us continuing subscribers with TWC:
It's great to complain about their lack of local interest in providing at least all of the currently "available" HD channels TWC can contractually offer, at least what is happening in other TWC locales.
-That's about all we can do unless we find a way to switch like those others did.
We, afterall, pay a good amount of money for cableTV service, so we are in our right to complain, especially if the cable rates are approx. the same as other TWC areas that get more HD channels than we do here in Wisconsin.
For example:
It would be like going shopping at different stores of the same name, the total at the cable "register" is the same, but your "bag" has twelve fewer items in it than the person shopping with the same items as you did at the same name store.
Wouldn't you feel sort of "cheated" that you have fewer items in your "bag", yet you got charged the same?
-Darn right you would!
So that is the "TWC equivalent" of what is happening here in with TWC HD Wisconsin subscribers.
Fewer HD channels than other areas of the country for the same cable "register receipt".

Now, not all of us can run to another provider if a tree is the way, or satellite equipment leasing fees are required, but many do.
Others have found ways around it (or have no trees and a perfect line-of-sight) - or have U-Verse available.

Whether or not TWC decides to do delivery on those "10+ HD channels" this year is anyone's guess.
But since TWC is so far behind the other competing subscriber services:
- it would very wise on their part locally, to carry whatever HD channels are offered by TWC nationally, now.

It will be "nice", but not great, to get those two new HD channels on the 14th.

Gparris - you are such a loyal (if not unhappy) TWC subscriber.... I'm curious - why not go to D*?  The "leasing" fees are no big deal - not any different than the TWC rental fees I wouldn't think.  Better programming, better customer service, etc.

Are you one of the few who can't mount a dish somewhere?  Even when I lived in Tosa, in a heavily treed neighborhood, I found a spot in my backyard where I could put it on a pole.  I guess if you are renting it is a different story.

But why complain if you can easily switch to the "Cadillac" of TV?  (unless you can't as I mentioned above of course)

[gparris]

Gparris - you are such a loyal (if not unhappy) TWC subscriber.... I'm curious - why not go to D*?  The "leasing" fees are no big deal - not any different than the TWC rental fees I wouldn't think.  Better programming, better customer service, etc.

Are you one of the few who can't mount a dish somewhere?  Even when I lived in Tosa, in a heavily treed neighborhood, I found a spot in my backyard where I could put it on a pole.  I guess if you are renting it is a different story.

But why complain if you can easily switch to the "Cadillac" of TV?  (unless you can't as I mentioned above of course)

Our household's requirement for four HD boxes, three at least would have to be HD DVRs and the ability of getting CBSHD and CWHD as our neighbours down the road get with Chicagoland over the dish. Waivers don't work, we've tried.
If you are in the wrong zipcode, no matter how close you are to the Chicago one, you can't get those five HD locals, which is the significant part of switching.
Another item IS cost since leasing setup costs were about $800 before antenna for the four HD boxes, three HD DVRs.
There are no "big deals", I was told many times, since the influx of new subscribers has been big, very big and the incentives to get new subscribers has been less emphasized.
(I don't think D* is screaming for new subs, anymore).
The antenna works great, I'm sure, in more Milwaukeeland areas, but not in my particular area on the border, for Milwaukee locals, it does not, so that is why I want my five HD locals from D*, if the lease costs can go down to a couple hundred dollars.
The point is, TWC sat around for the duration of the Directv satellite delays and it appears, that they did nothing, otherwise the contracts and technology would have been in place a great deal better than it is today.

That whole "quantity vs. quality of HD channels TWC likes to spout is understandable and D*, E* and U-Verse (U*?) have many.
However, to reduce valuable bandwidth space for many other different HD channels:
-TWC doesn't have to have all 5 Starz HD channels, it could have one and I'd be satisfied for my $11/month, same for one each for CinemaxHD and TMCHD.
-All five Discovery HD channels would be good, but USAHD and SciFi HD along with FXHD and so on, would be better, IMO:
Where are these on TWC?
Nowhere, because TWC didn't do it's competitive "homework".
So no, D* with its expensive upfront costs (unless I can get a real deal) AND all five HD locals, period.
(I could care less about PBSHD with Discovery's HD Theater.)
As far as alternatives go:
Our local government found a "technicality" on U-Verse and has driven it out, so to speak, at least for now, too.
That would have worked because there is no antenna required or DVR charges, even with one HD channel at a time (but that is changing in 2008).
U-Verse would have been enough just to send a message to TWC and get more HD channel availablity.

Thanks for asking, though!

[Mags]

I understand.  I'm not sure where you live exactly, but I can tell you that I'm out by 164 and Highway Q (basically southern Washington County) and I have no problem getting the locals via an antenna in my attic.

As far as the cost of the boxes - We got upgraded to 2 HD DVR's and 2 regular HD boxes for $599 total - minus about $400 in credits.  However, I was probably a lucky one in terms of cost outlay as I've been with them since 1994.

[gparris]

Thanks for the thoughtful reply.
Something to know:
When the house was built in '03, I added many helpful D* components like PVC tube runs throughout the house for adding RG6 cabling if required.
I had an antenna line to the attic, tubes to the upstairs master bedroom and chimney for the dish access, phone jacks where some of the TVs would go next to RG6 cable jacks for either service once more HD channels came about.
The interface panel TWC uses is state-of-the-art from the builder and has got compliments from installers.
To get D*, their own setup would be involved, but it would involve other complications, too, I'm certain, for the other locations in house without phone jacks or tubing, but maybe that wouldn't be as much as a concern as the main 3 HD DVR area requirements.
The biggest obstacle was the lack of good signal for the OTA, something I couldn't discover until we moved in to the house.
SO...if D*, as a  new customer, offers each DVR box for $99 after the first free, the HD STB (#4) also free, along with installation and what my nearby Chicagoland neighbours get for HD locals, I'M there!;)

[Mags]

Thanks for the thoughtful reply.
Something to know:
When the house was built in '03, I added many helpful D* components like PVC tube runs throughout the house for adding RG6 cabling if required.
I had an antenna line to the attic, tubes to the upstairs master bedroom and chimney for the dish access, phone jacks where some of the TVs would go next to RG6 cable jacks for either service once more HD channels came about.
The interface panel TWC uses is state-of-the-art from the builder and has got compliments from installers.
To get D*, their own setup would be involved, but it would involve other complications, too, I'm certain, for the other locations in house without phone jacks or tubing, but maybe that wouldn't be as much as a concern as the main 3 HD DVR area requirements.
The biggest obstacle was the lack of good signal for the OTA, something I couldn't discover until we moved in to the house.
SO...if D*, as a  new customer, offers each DVR box for $99 after the first free, the HD STB (#4) also free, along with installation and what my nearby Chicagoland neighbours get for HD locals, I'M there!;)

Good Luck with this - you certainly did things right when you built your house.  I also built in 2003 - but I wasn't as smart or experienced as you - I wish I would have run tubing.  I was lucky enough to run 2 coax's, 1 telephone, and 1 ethernet to each TV location.  But now I need more coax!

The one big downside (in my opinion) with the new HD boxes from D* is that you can't diplex the OTA signal into the satellite signal - which effectively means you need 3 coax to each TV.  While that was OK on my main floor (since my basement was unfinished), it was impossible to the 2nd floor - including the master bedroom.  I guess the only downside to not getting antenna upstairs (I could make a separate run from the attic, but I choose not to hassle with it) is not getting CBS in HD upstairs.  Oh well, what the heck - the bedroom has other purposes than just watching TV  :p

I can tell you that when I talked to D*, they had some type of "deal" where you could get an HD DVR and a HD box for $299 I think.  I think that is a standard offer - I did better since I'd been with them so long.

I realize what a pain it is to switch, but if you do finally decide to make the leap, I can tell you that you won't be sorry.  At least for a couple of years anyway.  What is available in 3 years or so in terms of new providers, etc is anyone's guess.

Good luck no matter which way you decide to go.

[gparris]

Stan in our forum had mentioned Directv coming out with this concept:
Single-Wire hardware out (called SWM).
It is not available yet as I know of, but it would be an excellent way to transfer from cable service to Directv service more seamlessly, using cable's RG6 wiring and jacks.
Instead of using two sat lines per box for DVR, then one for OTA, only one.
That single cable that goes to your HD DVR for TWC, for example, could be used instead of three, as I understand it.
Add that to less expensive lease setup costs per sat box, all HD locals and more fence-sitters will be in for that, I'm certain.
Outside of an actual dish, probably mounted on a pole (with no buildings or trees to stop signal), it will be a real "cable killer", IMO.

[Mags]

Stan in our forum had mentioned Directv coming out with this concept:
Single-Wire hardware out (called SWM).
It is not available yet as I know of, but it would be an excellent way to transfer from cable service to Directv service more seamlessly, using cable's RG6 wiring and jacks.
Instead of using two sat lines per box for DVR, then one for OTA, only one.
That single cable that goes to your HD DVR for TWC, for example, could be used instead of three, as I understand it.
Add that to less expensive lease setup costs per sat box, all HD locals and more fence-sitters will be in for that, I'm certain.
Outside of an actual dish, probably mounted on a pole (with no buildings or trees to stop signal), it will be a real "cable killer", IMO.

Yes, I had heard about this.   The real problem with this (from my perspective) is that D* is starting to phase out the H20 and replacing them with H21.... and I wanted to get the H20's, as the H21 does not have an OTA input...

So, if D* is getting rid of the H20's, and will no longer offer OTA input, why do they even need SWM?  I guess for the cable folks who only have 1 cable going to their TV.

But I guess I had the choice of:

1)  H20, needing 3 cables, but still having OTA input
2)  H21, needing 1 cable, but no OTA input

I chose #1

[gparris]

H21 and HR21 boxes for Directv are going to be used if the subscriber does not want or need any OTA because everything OTA (SD and HD) will be available from Directv, their assumption.
While this is all well and good, some subscribers would like to keep integration of OTA and Directv's local feeds in one box for guides and recordings, just the same.
Others like getting locals when weather is a factor from OTA, too, if it is accessable and the reception is stable.

Cable's decline will continue if it doesn't move faster to offer equivalent offerings for (HD)TV as other competing providers.
These other service providers will be the main reason for cable's continued decline if the price and channel delivery (value) is kept up along with good customer service on the part of these competitors.
Single-line hookups with the H20 and HR20 would prove that Directv's installation can be switched over from cable, quick and fast using the same lines, less fuss.

[syrett4]

My DTV Experience:

Had it installed yesterday in less than 2 hours.   Although he didn't have my digital coax cable hooked up to the digital port.  Oh well...easy fix.  

PQ is better than TWC.  TWC HD quality was excellent, but my jaw dropped during the Wings game on Versus last night, kind of like seeing HD for the first time again.

Tons of channels with the premier package.  Almost can't watch them all, takes 15 min to get through the lineup on the guide.

Overall very happy and my wife was able to find her channels as well.  

If you CAN switch, do it.  You won't regret it.

[gparris]

Congradulations, syrett4 on your switching to Directv (D*) experience.:wave:

My brother in Milwaukee says he will get the HR20, to replace his H20, just to start recording some of those new HD channels.
He says it's just to sort out the HD programming he wants to keep to watch.
(Yes, TWC, the wife and him together say they watch almost all of them some time or another).

He just has to train his wife to work the remote:
She's very bad with anything involving technology (but we're "training" her).:rof:

When he found out he got five StarzHD in HD, along with those many other new HD channels, he wondered why I was still watching Starz in SD with TWC.
I said I wondered, too, but he is close enough to the antenna farm (down the street) to get CBSHD, though he says he never watches it.

I would be lost without CBSHD since I watch at least six HD shows from this network alone, from "Ghost Whisperer" to "The Unit" and all the "CSI"'s and "Numbers".
CBSHD missing off sat locally, along with CWHD (3 HD shows) is why I won't switch yet and for weather locally, is on the 'net, anyway.
As for pricing, I just got a deal for a HT setup using one of my family's connections for 2 HR20s and a couple non-DVR boxes for a good discount, including installation for a Chicagoland install, where they get all FIVE HD locals off D*.

[brewguru]

I would be lost without CBSHD since I watch at least six HD shows from this network alone, from "Ghost Whisperer" to "The Unit" and all the "CSI"'s and "Numbers".

That just begs the question, how does Jennifer Love Hewitt look in HD??