FCC Cable Rules Change Will Require Consumers To Pay More For Basic Cable

Foxrac

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
44,471
Reaction score
448
Watching basic cable on your TV used to be simple. But if the FCC has its way, basic cable won’t be so basic (or free) anymore.

Under a recent Federal Communications Commission rule change effective Dec. 10, millions of television owners who do not currently have a cable box will have to get one for every set, according to public service consumer resource guide Consumer World.

And for some consumers, that could mean an additional monthly rental fee to access cable down the road.

"The FCC has once again found a way to pick the pockets of cable customers,” Consumer World founder Edgar Dworsky said in a press release.

Under the FCC's new rule, local cable TV operators can now scramble their signals, which means a set-top box will be required on every TV to view programs. Those boxes cost around $10 each per month, according to Consumer World.

Cable companies are likely to provide a limited number of free cable boxes for a year or two, but those will probably become fee-based in the future, according to Dworsky's report. Currently, it is possible to access cable without any box at all.

But the government agency has said that the rule will benefit consumers, not harm them. By allowing cable operators to encrypt the basic service and require a cable box, cable services can now be activated and deactivated remotely rather than requiring a house call, according to the government agency.

The FCC did acknowledge that the measure will negatively affect “a small number of cable subscribers who currently view the digital basic service tier without using a set-top box or other equipment.” But how small is that number really? While the exact number of customers hit by the new order is unknown, Consumer World claims that the rule will primarily affect households with more than one television, as TVs in kitchens, guest rooms and bedrooms are less likely to have a cable box or DVR attached. According to Nielsen, 65.9 million households have at least three TVs -- not exactly “a small number.”

To offset the initial cost of the required new cable boxes, the FCC will require cable operators to provide two free convertor boxes to customers with only basic service and one free convertor box to customers with higher tiers of service for two years. After that, customers will be required to rent or buy boxes of their own.

The catch? While television watchers today can view a high-definition signal from local providers without a cable box, nothing in the FCC order requires cable companies to provide free cable boxes that transmit an HD signal, according to Consumer World. Ultimately, how much the rule will affect the viewing experience of customers will depend on the quality of service cable companies decide to provide.

The threatening fee comes in the wake of Americans already paying more for basic cable services. The average cable TV subscriber paid close to three times as much for cable in 2011 than in 2001. The increase in price, from about $48 a month to $128, is driven by the increased cost of original programming and sports, according to the Los Angeles Times.

The U.S. appears to be behind the curve in terms of making cable services affordable for low-income households. A report by the New America Foundation found that while a basic internet, phone and TV bundles can cost as little as $33 in Seoul, South Korea, or $35 in Paris, France, costs regularly surpass $100 in U.S. cities like New York and San Francisco.

FCC Cable Rules Change Will Require Consumers To Pay More For Basic Cable
 
OTA is free. I don't need basic cable anyway.

OTA - lol, more limited and local channels only.

OTA doesn't carry MTV, Spike, A&E, TruTV, CNN, National Geographic Channel, Disney, Nick, FX, etc.
 
I want a la carte cable channel at low rate. I won't want to watch music channels, kids channels, etc. I favor local channels, family and docs channels, news/weather channels and sports channels.
 
I want a la carte cable channel at low rate. I won't want to watch music channels, kids channels, etc. I favor local channels, family and docs channels, news/weather channels and sports channels.

Tell to the congress, especially the house of reps and FCC.
 
The cable companies and ISP need to increase the competition to make price so low, like South Korea has a lot of competition so it make easier for price to be low. I don't like monopolies like only one ISP (like at&t) can control the area (like Atlanta) since other ISP control (CenturyLink) to control the different area (like Denver).

I think FCC rules are just silly.
 
OTA - lol, more limited and local channels only.

OTA doesn't carry MTV, Spike, A&E, TruTV, CNN, National Geographic Channel, Disney, Nick, FX, etc.

I only watch one of the station you have. CNN . I have Disney and never watch it. I hate it that I had to pay for stations that I will never , like home shopping or religious stations. I wish I could pick out the stations I want to watch.
 
I only watch one of the station you have. CNN . I have Disney and never watch it. I hate it that I had to pay for stations that I will never , like home shopping or religious stations. I wish I could pick out the stations I want to watch.
You can do that by setting up favorite channels on your STB easily.

I know what you mean about having to pay a full price when you don't need some channels that you never watch.
 
I agree with other posters, OTA is the way to go. Also, add netflix with an account at your local library and you are golden. Best thing I ever did was to dump cable, saved $800+ a year.
 
I agree with other posters, OTA is the way to go. Also, add netflix with an account at your local library and you are golden. Best thing I ever did was to dump cable, saved $800+ a year.

OTA isn't option for me because all of my favorite shows come from channels that only limited to basic and digital.

Netflix? Not everyone have fast internet speed and it is out of option for slower DSL, so exurb and rural residents are out of luck, also satellite internet has strict cap so can't run shows for 3 hours per day to max the usage limitation.
 
I agree with other posters, OTA is the way to go. Also, add netflix with an account at your local library and you are golden. Best thing I ever did was to dump cable, saved $800+ a year.

I actually have a Sat Dish at each location, but OTA is always a good fallback. I don't complain about the costs or fees because I realize it is a want and not a need......also it's a choice. Silly to complain about fees IMO.
 
I'm Directv customer and not concerned about their price because they don't increase the rate so faster as cable companies do, so any unjustifiable cost increases so Directv will goes into dispute with carriage, like they did to Viacom last summer with success.

The cable companies are start losing the subscribers due to cost increase and when the monthly cost goes high so the cable companies will try to tighten because they don't want to lose too much subscribers. I believe that TV studios and sports (NFL, NBA) are unionized so they care about gimme, gimme, gimme, so they want make too much money by increase the cost that pass on customers.

The customers have rights to complain, no matters if it is need or want, so that's not crazy or silly to being complain about unusual cost increases. The cable companies need customers to keep their business running.

I'm not concerned about 3rd paragraph above, but I only care about monopoly and I just want to have more competition among ISP and cable companies. The satellite TV does have some competition like Dish and Directv.
 
I'm Directv customer and not concerned about their price because they don't increase the rate so faster as cable companies do, so any unjustifiable cost increases so Directv will goes into dispute with carriage, like they did to Viacom last summer with success.

The cable companies are start losing the subscribers due to cost increase and when the monthly cost goes high so the cable companies will try to tighten because they don't want to lose too much subscribers. I believe that TV studios and sports (NFL, NBA) are unionized so they care about gimme, gimme, gimme, so they want make too much money by increase the cost that pass on customers.

The customers have rights to complain, no matters if it is need or want, so that's not crazy or silly to being complain about unusual cost increases. The cable companies need customers to keep their business running.

I'm not concerned about 3rd paragraph above, but I only care about monopoly and I just want to have more competition among ISP and cable companies. The satellite TV does have some competition like Dish and Directv.

Sports channels' price is high. ESPN tops the list of the most expensive cable networks, charging subscribers about $5.00 a month; the two next most expensive channels.

If_You_Don%27t_Watch_Sports,-1fc76125b60552c5c27075dae1bbdf96


If You Don't Watch Sports, TV Is a Huge Rip-Off (So, How Do We Fix It?) - Yahoo! Finance
 
I actually have a Sat Dish at each location, but OTA is always a good fallback. I don't complain about the costs or fees because I realize it is a want and not a need......also it's a choice. Silly to complain about fees IMO.

I disagree. You know, it wasn't too long ago banks didn't charge fees for keeping money in a bank, you actually made money by keeping it there. Cable also has a monopoly on the market and is charging because consumers have no choice. One town over from me, for the same services, cable is 1/3 of the cost it is in my town due to regulation. Cable had the ability not too long ago of shutting off ALL NFL games if you didn't buy a certain package for $30 more a month. That same NFL game was free before cable got involved. Maybe you pay reasonable rates were you are, but here $80 a month just for TV not including internet or phone is a little high in my opinion.

Boston just recently gained the power to regulate it again(of course cable is appealing the decision):
http://www.cedmagazine.com/news/2012/04/boston-regains-power-to-regulate-basic-cable
 
I disagree. You know, it wasn't too long ago banks didn't charge fees for keeping money in a bank, you actually made money by keeping it there. Cable also has a monopoly on the market and is charging because consumers have no choice. One town over from me, for the same services, cable is 1/3 of the cost it is in my town due to regulation. Cable had the ability not too long ago of shutting off ALL NFL games if you didn't buy a certain package for $30 more a month. That same NFL game was free before cable got involved. Maybe you pay reasonable rates were you are, but here $80 a month just for TV not including internet or phone is a little high in my opinion.

Boston just recently gained the power to regulate it again(of course cable is appealing the decision):
Boston regains power to regulate basic cable | News | CED Magazine - Communications, Engineering and Design Magazine

Totally agree. It's just ridiculous. before I left the husband we had HD cable and HBO, internet and digital phone service, and the bill was close to $170 a month. Don't even get me started on the fees for cell phone service. I can't even wrap my head around any justifications for why cable and cell phone service is so ridiculously high. When I moved out I asked my kids, okay, do you want guys want cable or to keep your cell phones, they picked their phones so we stream netfliks. Internet access $29.99, netfliks $8, so now I pay less than $40. This is catching on more and more, they are going to have to change things.

What's OTA?
 
What's OTA?

You're smart and you made the right choice. OTA is Over The Air which you can get with a HD antenna so you won't need to get basic cable from the cable company.

At the moment I have an indoor antenna, but I'm thinking of getting an outdoor for more channels.
 
I want a la carte cable channel at low rate. I won't want to watch music channels, kids channels, etc. I favor local channels, family and docs channels, news/weather channels and sports channels.

you, me and a million others want the same thing! lets unite and protest! :cheers:
 
Back
Top