CRTC Approves Un-Bundling of Channels

[Mike F]

Story (http://business.financialpost.com/2012/07/20/canadian-tv-viewers-to-have-more-choice-but-at-a-cost/).

The option to pick and pay for only the channels that a viewer wants to watch moved closer to becoming a reality for millions of TV subscribers on Friday.


The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission decided Friday to adopt a proposal from Bell to allow its channels to be unbundled while rates for individual networks will fluctuate based on the number of subscribers who sign up.


With Bell shifting away from “tied selling” other major channel owners like Shaw Media and Rogers Media are likely to follow suit. “It wont just be us, if you’re a cable provider, you really need all of your suppliers to participate,” Mr. Crull said.

[WhiteTiger]

So glad to hear this. I only ever want to watch 3-4 channels, but am not interested in paying for 30-40 I don't care about on top of paying for the service in the first place.

[TurnedTheCorner]

I could live with 8-10 HD channels (TSN, TSN2, SNW, SN1, Score, AMC, HBO, CTV, Global) and be completely satisfied. Interesting.

[gottabekd]

Awesome. I'm paying $30/month just for TSN + Sportsnet. If you want CBC, CTV, CityTV, Global, you can get it for free over-the-air anyways.

Also, I'll pay an extra $5/month for AMC. But not $10.

[Caged Great]

So will this be the case for all channels, and all carriers?

There's only about 20 channels that I use even occasionally and some I'd like to add but don't want the other 15 channels in the bundle.

[DownhillGoat]

I'll be quite happy if I can just get the HD channels without having to pay for the 150 SD channels I don't watch.

[WilsonFourTwo]

Wow. I might just have to reconsider my absolute hatred from the CRTC. They got something very, very right here.

[MrMastodonFarm]

I could live with 8-10 HD channels (TSN, TSN2, SNW, SN1, Score, AMC, HBO, CTV, Global) and be completely satisfied. Interesting.

Yup, just give me the HD channels and eff everything else. I don't watch them don't need them.

I just watch National Geographic HD, I don't even want the SD version of it.

[metallicat]

Oh man, this sounds so awesome. My mouth is watering at saving a bunch of money per month by losing the useless channels. Am I too hopeful?

[Slava]

You guys are assuming that you will end up paying less for the fewer channels you enjoy. I bet that's not how it will shakedown.

This. Basically they give away a bunch of channels as it is right now, so the cost to add those to channels you want will be nothing anyway. It's not a flat rate per channel; popular channels will cost more than channels that no one wants.

The interesting thing to watch will be which channels survive though. Can a channel remain profitable/in business with just a few thousand subscribers? I also wonder about the obvious conflict of interest where cable providers also provide content. Interesting to watch.

[SeoulFire]

This. Basically they give away a bunch of channels as it is right now, so the cost to add those to channels you want will be nothing anyway. It's not a flat rate per channel; popular channels will cost more than channels that no one wants.

The interesting thing to watch will be which channels survive though. Can a channel remain profitable/in business with just a few thousand subscribers? I also wonder about the obvious conflict of interest where cable providers also provide content. Interesting to watch.

Surviving for the sake of surviving is not good enough in my opinion. If they are not offering content that people what then why should they be cluttering up the airwaves?

[Slava]

Surviving for the sake of surviving is not good enough in my opinion. If they are not offering content that people what then why should they be cluttering up the airwaves?

Oh, I don't disagree at all. It will be interesting for sure. I would guess that most people would be satisfied with say 20 channels or less. Through CP I would hazard a guess that this would require a total of about 40-45 channels with a lot of overlap. So when you have to buy these tiered bundles everyone is getting a huge amount they never watch. Will consumers willing pay the same amount for 1/10th of the channels? Thats what the cable providers will aim for.

[gottabekd]

You guys are assuming that you will end up paying less for the fewer channels you enjoy. I bet that's not how it will shakedown.

So right now I get 30 channels for $30. Let's say I just want 2 channels: TSN ans Sportsnet. You're right , I bet that costs $20. So, less, but still a decision point. It makes the bundle look like a deal.

[Joborule]

Awesome news. Good job CRTC.

[SuperMatt18]

Not sure this is actually a positive, if it's a proposal from the cable co's it's likely not because they wail make less money this way.

Instead of paying $9 for a bundle you will now just pay a premium for individual channels and the cable co will save on content costs since they have to pay a rate to the channel provider for each subscriber.

So now they will charge more for each individual channel and will save more on content costs win-win for them.

[TurnedTheCorner]

You guys are assuming that you will end up paying less for the fewer channels you enjoy. I bet that's not how it will shakedown.

I honestly think I would be OK with paying more for subscribing to only what I want to pay for. I'd have to see the final prices before I could say that for sure. But knowing my money isn't subsidizing a bunch of crap I have no interest in and would never, ever watch is a good trade off.

[To Be Quite Honest]

You guys are assuming that you will end up paying less for the fewer channels you enjoy. I bet that's not how it will shakedown.

It will certainly tell everyone where advertizing dollars should go. Those dollars should make these channels cost less.

[Mike F]

From the article:

“Fewer channels will mean unit costs for those channels will be higher than if you buy a bigger package,” the Bell executive said. “There’s a volume discount” for viewers who take bigger TV tiers with more channels.

If TSN for example costs a cable subscriber $2.50 month in a bundled package, individually, that fee could soar north of $10. Still, by opening up channels, consumers who want fewer channels at a lower cost will get their wish, Mr. Crull said.

Asked whether the new model lower bills, which are averaging about $60/month nowadays, he said: “It will for some people for sure, you will now have the ability and choice to buy a package that very well could lower your overall bill.”
I went through my regular viewing lineup, and I could drop about 15 of the HD channels I currently get and all of the SD.

However, the ones I would keep would be TSN, TSN2, SN, etc., which would likely carry the high price tag.

In the end, though, we'll finally have a choice, and choice is good.

[Table 5]

If nothing else, if I could drop SD entirely from my line up and save whatever that costs me, I'd be one happy camper.

[Finny61]

I'll just remain pessimistic on how this will play out.

[Alberta_Beef]

I could live with 8-10 HD channels (TSN, TSN2, SNW, SN1, Score, AMC, HBO, CTV, Global) and be completely satisfied. Interesting.you forgot CBC for HNIC ;)

me personally I would only need TSN, TSN2, SNW, SN1 and CBC. The only time I watch TV is hockey, with the occasional Jays game in the summer.

[OilKiller]

you forgot CBC for HNIC ;)

me personally I would only need TSN, TSN2, SNW, SN1 and CBC. The only time I watch TV is hockey, with the occasional Jays game in the summer.

Well, if you don't get AMC for The Walking Dead, then you're not one of the cool kids. For shame.

[Regular_John]

I'll just remain pessimistic on how this will play out.

Sadly that's my impression as well. Yes they "can" un-bundle channels, but I'd be shocked if the providers went full on a la carte and still kept prices reasonable.

"Oh sure, you can pick any channel you want for only $5/month (plus additional system access fees/taxes/regulatory recovery fee, system enhancement fee) but why not consider our most popular KableKlassics Package*? For just $30 you get over 30 channels! A savings of x% from our a la carte pricing!"

*The KableKlassics package can not be combined with any a la carte channels but additional KableKlassics add ons can be purchased for an additional charge

[Alberta_Beef]

Well, if you don't get AMC for The Walking Dead, then you're not one of the cool kids. For shame.any TV show I watch I just download, the only thing I ever watch "live" is sports

[MrMastodonFarm]

any TV show I watch I just download, the only thing I ever watch "live" is sports

Really?

I try to watch as much as I can on TV prior to downloading it. If it's my last option though I will (Futurama).

Though I do hope one day soon we will move away from the cable model and most things are on demand.

[taffeyb]

Let's see the pricing for the individual channels before we start toasting this....What would be ideal is if we can get various channels from different providers through the exiting infrastructure. TSN from Bell and TLC from Rogers....etc...that would lead to competitive pricing...no different that the phone companies having to allow competitors access to their networks...

[TurnedTheCorner]

you forgot CBC for HNIC ;)
I forgot nothing.

[nik-]

Yeah, there's no way they're going to price this so they make less than they are now.

[Red Ice Player]

I can't wait to drop TLC from my line up. I would happily pay extra to have that piece of crap channel disappear forever. What a waste of an HD slot.

[Alberta_Beef]

Really?

I try to watch as much as I can on TV prior to downloading it. If it's my last option though I will (Futurama).

Though I do hope one day soon we will move away from the cable model and most things are on demand.I work midnights and have some insomnia issues (which has me sleeping alot of evenings), so I can never catch shows when they are on and if I do I am behind (which drives me nuts) so without a PVR it's either download or don't watch and I refuse to set an alarm to wake up for anything TV related other than the Flames.

To be honest alot of the stuff I end up watching will also be in the summertime when there is no hockey, or I will be so out of the loop I won't even know about a show until a season or 2 are finished. Unfortunately I am not in a position where I have much disposable income so paying the prices associated with purchasing full seasons are usually out of my price range, so I will download full seasons in the summer and watch them then.

[metallicat]

Any idea when this is going to happen?

[Alberta_Beef]

Any idea when this is going to happen?damn you! lol. I seen this was bumped and I was hoping it had new info :whaa:

[rubecube]

I can't wait to drop TLC from my line up. I would happily pay extra to have that piece of crap channel disappear forever. What a waste of an HD slot.

What? You don't like quality programming such as "My Gipsy Redneck Wedding," and "Fat People Who Wear Wedding Dresses," followed by "Midget Gastric Bypass Stories?"

Remember when TLC actually used to be educational? Remember when the History Channel actually used to be historical? TV is a barren wasteland and a sad reflection on society.

[Coach]

In half? more like 90%. When this happens I am only ordering sports channels. That's it. Everything else can be downloaded/streamed.

[Tinordi]

Which is why all your hopes of this actually being good should be dashed.

[OilKiller]

We are all just counting down the days when our bills can be cut in half. Can't wait, its going to be awesome. Wouldn't want to own the stock in these companies though.

LOL...why do I have visions of Fotze turning blue as he continues to hold his breath...:) I know, I know, green text.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

In half? more like 90%. When this happens I am only ordering sports channels. That's it. Everything else can be downloaded/streamed.

You really think these crooks are going to make it cheaper? They'll make TSN and every other sports channel $10 each.

[Coach]

If may cable isn't cheaper after cutting 90% of my channels im cancelling it. Cheaper to go the bar for every flames game probably

[Julio]

You really think these crooks are going to make it cheaper? They'll make TSN and every other sports channel $10 each.

Well it's not just the cable operators. Sports are by far the most expensive channels on cable/satellite television for the distributors.. TSN and Sportsnet gets about $16 per subscriber a year, whereas CBC News gets about $6, Comedy gets about $4, YTV gets about $3 and The Score around $2.50.
(All the numbers for each channel are here BTW: http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/branalysis/psp2011/individual/ipsp2011.htm )

[nik-]

If may cable isn't cheaper after cutting 90% of my channels im cancelling it. Cheaper to go the bar for every flames game probably

15 games a month would be at least $150 a month, and that's if you're the worst bar patron in the world.

[Alberta_Beef]

In half? more like 90%. When this happens I am only ordering sports channels. That's it. Everything else can be downloaded/streamed.you must not live with a woman, I know my girl won't let me cut out all the garbage channels she finds entertaining

[HotHotHeat]

Has anyone actually had luck making changes? Just called Shaw and they wouldn't let me.

[HotHotHeat]

Looks like this is coming in March...

Cable and satellite providers must provide skinny basic packages priced at $25 a month to every consumer by March 1, 2016, the CRTC says.

The federal broadcast regulator laid out a timetable Thursday for changes to ways television signals are distributed across Canada.

In addition to the basic $25 package, cable and satellite providers must move to a pick-and-pay system or offer small bundles of channels, also by the March 1 deadline. They must offer both by Dec. 1 of next year.

The basic package must include channels on the CRTC's mandatory distribution list, including CBC, CTV and Global, and aboriginal and minority English or French language channels. In addition a group of U.S. channels could be included, usually CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX and non-commercial channel PBS.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/cable-changes-timing-1.3326645

[Looch City]

I'm sure by February 1, 2016, all cellphone plans will again increase by $5 to compensate for this.

[Coach]

Still not what I want. Still not getting my business.

Sorry team, I'm not paying $25/month for crap I don't use.

[Erick Estrada]

As always when it comes to the CRTC and the major networs handshake dealings I'm highly skeptical that this will benefit consumers. In fact this may make is more expensive for sports fans as the networks will inflate those channels to make up for losing income on the fluff channels they forced you to take in bundles.

[Joborule]

That's what I'm expecting. I'm lukewarm to the concept since I don't believe there will be savings for the consumer. More people are cutting the cord year by year, so they'll need to make up money, and sports channels will be an easy bundle to make "premium" pricing for.

[GGG]

With bundles watchers of sports get subsidized by the watchers of crap. Anyone who watches more TV channels is subsidized by those who don't

I suspect being sports fans on average users of this site will pay more in an unbundled system and not have the option to watch that one show you wanted on a different channel.

If you are the average viewer you don't pay for the stuff you don't watch right now. You get the stuff you don't watch for free. If 5 million people op out of tsn then the tsn fee goes up to cover it. The total bill for cable will be at best revenue neutral here. What you will end up with is paying the same if you are lucky for less channels.

This is as stupid as people who wanted 2 year contracts for phones when the correct solution was banning combining the financing of the phone with the costs of the service

[sa226]

What concerns me is when the providers start jacking up Internet prices to compensate for people cutting the cord. I don't really care about the TV end of things, but the Internet is something that every household seems to have as a bare minimum.

Just your run of the mill basic standalone broadband connection is already pretty pricey.

[ken0042]

You nailed it, GGG. I have heard the argument of:
- I currently pay $100 per month for 100 channels.
- I only watch 5 of those channels.
- Therefore I should be able to get my 5 channels per month for $5.

Of course a lot of people here seem to understand that the cost per channel may be higher than that, but I can't see my example above coming in any lower than $40 per month.

[HotHotHeat]

As always when it comes to the CRTC and the major networs handshake dealings I'm highly skeptical that this will benefit consumers. In fact this may make is more expensive for sports fans as the networks will inflate those channels to make up for losing income on the fluff channels they forced you to take in bundles.

That's one way of looking at it, for sure.

I'm interested in how it ends up coming together. If they end up increasing pricing on a service model that is losing subscribers, the only logical result is they will lose even more.... Which is what needs to happen for the industry to break in the first place.

Overall I think the pay and pay model will kill off all the channels that are literally spam in my TV guide, and for that reason alone it's a good thing.

[Resolute 14]

Yup. This is going to backfire as badly as the whining against three year phone contracts did.

Except in this scenario, both the consumer and the provider will lose.

[GGG]

You nailed it, GGG. I have heard the argument of:
- I currently pay $100 per month for 100 channels.
- I only watch 5 of those channels.
- Therefore I should be able to get my 5 channels per month for $5.

Of course a lot of people here seem to understand that the cost per channel may be higher than that, but I can't see my example above coming in any lower than $40 per month.

If those channels are HBO and the premium Sports channels I suspect that you'd end up a lot closer to that $100 number.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/pick-and-pay-cable-tv-would-offer-greater-choice-crtc-boss-says-1.2753436

HGTV earns approximately $1.90 a year per subscriber, or $0.16 per month. Showcase gets $3.50 per year, or $0.29 per month.
TSN gets $30 per year, or $2.50 per month.
Movie Central and Movie Network — which distributes HBO Canada — earn more than $8 per month.

The above is an old article but has some numbers to work with for a discussion. Keeping in mind that this is the cost to Shaw and not the cost to Shaws customers and its unclear if that is all tsn or just TSN 1. You can use the HBO number as a guide shaw charges roughly 2.25 times to the customer then it is paying the Channel.

So with the 40 odd channels you don't want being worth between 16 cents and 50 cents at max you get $20 in savings which get quickly eaten up by households who dump the sports channels.

Shaw charges $17 per month for sportsnet world so I suspect it would be similar for TSN and Sportsnet channels with maybe is discount when you add East and or TSN 2,3,4,5.

[nfotiu]

With bundles watchers of sports get subsidized by the watchers of crap. Anyone who watches more TV channels is subsidized by those who don't

I suspect being sports fans on average users of this site will pay more in an unbundled system and not have the option to watch that one show you wanted on a different channel.

If you are the average viewer you don't pay for the stuff you don't watch right now. You get the stuff you don't watch for free. If 5 million people op out of tsn then the tsn fee goes up to cover it. The total bill for cable will be at best revenue neutral here. What you will end up with is paying the same if you are lucky for less channels.

This is as stupid as people who wanted 2 year contracts for phones when the correct solution was banning combining the financing of the phone with the costs of the service

I'm a sports watcher, and there are definitely sports channels I'd pay for. But I think it is ridiculous that the 80% or so people who almost never watch some of these expensive sports channels are forced to pay for them. TSN and the like cannot just charge what they want if they expect people to pay for them. I have no problem with them setting a price that maximizes their revenues if everyone has the choice whether to pay for the channels or not. Their revenue will definitely take a hit and they'll just have to pay less to the sports leagues, and the sports leagues will have to adjust their salaries lower. IMO that is a good thing. Carriage fees of sports channels and public financing of stadiums have subsidized athlete's salaries for far too long

Most of the crap channels have tiny carriage fees and are mostly advertiser supported. The expensive movie channels have always been a la carte.

[polak]

Yeah currently I pay $50 a month for 100+ channels and 30 mbps internet.

There's no way I see this new thing coming out cheaper than that.

[keratosis]

Yeah currently I pay $50 a month for 100+ channels and 30 mbps internet.

There's no way I see this new thing coming out cheaper than that.
That has to be for the first 6 months only. I don't see a plan anywhere that is that cheep. $60 was the cheapest comparable I saw and that was for the first 6 months for new subscribers. Then bumped by $80 a month.

[polak]

Yup it is for the first 6 months. I'll cancel and switch to whoever gives me the best deal in a few months.

If I can't find something cheap then I'll just cancel my cable all together. Useless for anything besides sports.

[HotHotHeat]

Did you buy the equipment on day one?

[Finger Cookin]

If those channels are HBO and the premium Sports channels I suspect that you'd end up a lot closer to that $100 number.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/pick-and-pay-cable-tv-would-offer-greater-choice-crtc-boss-says-1.2753436

HGTV earns approximately $1.90 a year per subscriber, or $0.16 per month. Showcase gets $3.50 per year, or $0.29 per month.
TSN gets $30 per year, or $2.50 per month.
Movie Central and Movie Network — which distributes HBO Canada — earn more than $8 per month.

The above is an old article but has some numbers to work with for a discussion. Keeping in mind that this is the cost to Shaw and not the cost to Shaws customers and its unclear if that is all tsn or just TSN 1. You can use the HBO number as a guide shaw charges roughly 2.25 times to the customer then it is paying the Channel.

So with the 40 odd channels you don't want being worth between 16 cents and 50 cents at max you get $20 in savings which get quickly eaten up by households who dump the sports channels.

Shaw charges $17 per month for sportsnet world so I suspect it would be similar for TSN and Sportsnet channels with maybe is discount when you add East and or TSN 2,3,4,5.

This is good info, thanks for sharing.

So if TSN (presumably just the main channel) costs a company like Shaw $2.50 a month, the 2.25 factor would put it up to $5.75-$6.00. But you pointed that Sportsnet World costs $17. I would think that to get the TSN 1-5 might cost a little less than $17, considering most of the time the feeds show the same content. $15 maybe? And maybe we could see the Sportsnet / Sportsnet 1 / Sportsnet 360 channels offered together for about $15 as well.

Throw in an AMC, an HBO, and maybe something like FX or Showtime, and that might be another $20-$30.

Add those to the skinny bundle that must be offered (hopefully this includes some US networks), and I could see something like an $85-$95 cable bill for just picking only the channels I want. This is opposed to a $53 bill now for the minimum Personal TV from Shaw, + Sports1 bundle (which gets me TS2 and Sportsnet 360), but doesn't include the premium channels. If I threw in HBO and AMC under the current billing, the bill would jump from $53 to $106, as it doesn't look like AMC is available on its own but as part of a 46 channel "Best of HD" bundle for $35.

Hmmm.

[HotHotHeat]

My math worked out quite a bit lower.

$25 - Skinny package - All main US, Canadian networks (according to the article posted earlier)
$8 - TSN Pack
$8 - Sportsnet Pack
$6 - AMC
$4 - CNN
$4 - History

Total $55

I think TSN is actually going to lose out huge on this. They hold rights to two NFL games/week... Can't think of anything else.

[calgaryrocks]

My math worked out quite a bit lower.

$25 - Skinny package - All main US, Canadian networks (according to the article posted earlier)
$8 - TSN Pack
$8 - Sportsnet Pack
$6 - AMC
$4 - CNN
$4 - History

Total $55

I think TSN is actually going to lose out huge on this. They hold rights to two NFL games/week... Can't think of anything else.
TSN - CFL - the only way to get it...
given the above, I would be fine with $41/mo compared to what I am paying now....we will see what the actual prices will be!

[Resolute 14]

I think TSN is actually going to lose out huge on this. They hold rights to two NFL games/week... Can't think of anything else.

CFL, EPL, tennis majors, major curling, World Hockey Championships, world Junior Hockey Championships, curling majors. Leafs, Jets, Senators and Habs (IIRC) regional rights

[Coach]

Charge me $10/month for sports package and I will pay it.

Give me a "Shaw Cable" app (or whatever provider) that I can link through my PS4.

You could arguably make more money from people this way. You capture the people like me that will cut the cord otherwise, and you can possibly get more from the people that want more service (or keep the bundles along with select packages like above).

Each 'package' between $5-$10/month or bundle 5 packages for $50-$80/month.

[Knut]

HBO
AMC
VOD
SPORTSNET + HD Channels
Kids cartoon package
And SLICE for my Wife's real housewives addiction.
That should be enough

[Finger Cookin]

My math worked out quite a bit lower.

$25 - Skinny package - All main US, Canadian networks (according to the article posted earlier)
$8 - TSN Pack
$8 - Sportsnet Pack
$6 - AMC
$4 - CNN
$4 - History

Total $55

I think TSN is actually going to lose out huge on this. They hold rights to two NFL games/week... Can't think of anything else.
$8 is the cost to Shaw. They're not going to re-sell it to the consumer at cost. They might not go as high as $15 like I guessed either, though. We'll see!

The article also said that the "skinny" bundle must include mandatory distribution Canadian channels, and "could" include US networks. Hence my wish that the US networks are included, and not sold as a separate bundle or package (like how timeshift is now).

[MrMastodonFarm]

CFL, EPL, tennis majors, major curling, World Hockey Championships, world Junior Hockey Championships, curling majors. Leafs, Jets, Senators and Habs (IIRC) regional rights

Sportsnet has the rights to the Habs. The Leafs are split between TSN and Sportsnet oddly.

TSN also has exclusive rights to UFC programming, add that to the list.

[KevanGuy]

TSN also has exclusive rights to UFC programming, add that to the list.

And NASCAR - though you can catch Sprint Cup on Fox and NBC.

[GGG]

I would bet at least a 2 multiplier between what shaw pays and what they sell. If you are just buying premium TV and Sports there is no way your bill comes out cheaper

[polak]

Did you buy the equipment on day one?

No I'm renting it I believe? They didn't charge me anything extra.

All I'd want is Sportsnet and CBC.

TSN would be nice but I could live without it as most of the tennis is featured on the american channels.

[accord1999]

TSN would be nice but I could live without it as most of the tennis is featured on the american channels.
Unless you have ESPN, the only thing on the broadcast American networks are semis and finals of the French Open and Wimbledon.

[polak]

Unless you have ESPN, the only thing on the broadcast American networks are semis and finals of the French Open and Wimbledon.

What about the US Open?

To be honest, unless Genie or Roanic step up their game immensely, or another Canadian contender emerges, I'll probably be watching very little Tennis once Federer retires.

Plus there are solid streams for Tennis.

[accord1999]

What about the US Open?
CBS no longer broadcasts it, its final year was 2014.

Though, with Sportsnet they have pretty good coverage of Masters and 500 level events.

[Hugh Jahrmes]

Right now I pay $72 for 30mbps, unltd North american long distance, basic cable + sports + history + MC/HBO, for 6 months (in first month now)
After 6 months, I think I end up around 95-100. After a year the promo on my BB30 expires and reverts to 15. They lowered me from 60 (which iirc was 100, but went up in price and down in speed in the last year) to 15 in order to save little more, and then gave me a 12mo promo to BB30. I doubt I'll get too worried when the Initial 6 month promo expires, but im sure once it goes over 100 in a year, they'll have something available to keep my account open.

All of this discussion makes me wonder though, if im not better kff actually getting on a contract with Telus before March. Their offer was 95ish for the first year, then the remainder of a 36mo contract at 150/mo.

I do prefer their TV, and with this they've offered to replace my PVR collection too.

Hope the pricing is made public with enough time to make an informed decision before Shaw has me rolling over into something pricey as hell, and the Telus offers are suddenly a little more parched.

I don't watch other chsnnels often, but I don't like the idea of losing a service I'm accustomed to:. Im not even consciously aware of which channels are stacked on top of my base plan that I watch semi regularly. History was pointed out .. HGTV? Ssems like whenever my parents are over Theyre watching stuff I never have on either.

Really don't want to give up HBO, is jt really 35? Wow

[polak]

XBMC/Kodi is a completely legal device that I suggest all of you look into.

[accord1999]

Really don't want to give up HBO, is jt really 35? Wow
$18 is the normal price and includes Movie Central:

http://www.shaw.ca/television/channels/premium-channels/

[Hugh Jahrmes]

XBMC/Kodi is a completely legal device that I suggest all of you look into.


The software is legal, but is using plugins to access content you don't have rights to fully legal?

Just asking as I have the option of grtting a bunch of quad core android devices cheap that run it, and it'd make great affordable gifts for a lot of family members. Theyre pretty concerned with consequences of watching movies online so I don't want to end up with someone in an Uncomfortable situation

[Fuzz]

^Ignorance is bliss.

[polak]

What are these plugins you speak of ;)

[metallicat]

So we are, what, less than four months away from a la carte TV being mandatory as per the CRTC, and I've still heard zip on what is actually going to happen. I had Telus install just the internet at my home and he was pushing hard for me to bundle it with a TV package. I refused citing the fact that I wanted to wait until December. Why is there still so little information out there about options and pricing come December? Is it intentional because they want to get people into bigger bundles while they still can? I am being naive in hoping for good deals come December?

[DownhillGoat]

^The details of the initial $25 package came out what? An hour before the deadline?

I am being naive in hoping for good deals come December?
Yes.

[nik-]

It will probably be $10 a channel. More than two or three and you might as well buy a package. I expect no less from our providers.

[GGG]

There are no good deals unless you don't watch sports. The guarenteed money tsn and sportsnet get right now from every subscriber subsidizes all of CalgaryPucks cable watching.

Look at the $25 per month sports net is charging for its streaming service. So $25 for TSN and $25 for Sportsnet.

There will be no deals for us. Your Grandma might get a great deal on cable but not us.