President of Shaw: Consumers prefer bundled TV packages

[Matty81]

Can't believe how asinine that comment is from Shaw - guy is a dinosaur. They seem to be in a bit of a vicious circle right now where they are bleeding subscribers because of their content model and keep pushing the cost a bit higher to compensate, losing even more.

I couldn't believe it when my folks cancelled their shaw cable, now a year later I often think of doing the same thing myself. I watch about 3 channels and my wife watches 3 but between the different packages we need to pay for to get them the bill is ridiculous.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by pylon

When I cancelled my Shaw services today, I made it abundantly clear the position of their CEO on bundled TV did not represent my opinion as a customer and was a major factor in my cancellation. When asked if there was anything they could do to keep my business, I stated "Yeah, refund me the 41 bucks a month I have been paying the last 3 years for non HD channels I never watch anymore, and going forward never charge me for them again."

"Sorry sir, we cannot do that. You have to pay for the standard channels."

"Sorry Shaw, I cannot pay you anymore."

I figure, in the 17 years, I have been a customer, they have got a little over $20,000 of my money, and they do NOTHING, to try and keep you as a customer. Shaw sucks, is getting worse, and is the worst run company in Canada. F U Shaw, blow it out your ass.

I'm so envious, because I really want to do this. I've been extremely close (to the point where I was hacking everything with the rep on the phone, but they explained the reconnection fees if I changed my mind).

How are you going to watch shows though? I am mostly concerned about sports....if I could watch that conveniently then I think I could do it.

[Torture]

If I could pick my channels I would only need about 5 channels.

TSN
TSN2
Sportsnet West
Sportsnet One
CBC

[OilKiller]

Originally Posted by Torture

If I could pick my channels I would only need about 5 channels.

TSN
TSN2
Sportsnet West
Sportsnet One
CBC

I would add:

NBC East HD
NBC West HD
CBS East HD
CBS West HD
ABC East HD
ABC West HD
FOX East HD
FOX West HD
CW HD

So basically 14 channels that we watch and we pay through the nose.

[newts]

For those who have canceled their cable, I'd be curious to know what kind of setup you have going forward, and how much you are spending on a monthly basis to get it.

[CaramonLS]

They should have itunes for TV channels, would you like 30 days access to this channel? Ok, but you will be charged between 0.99 - 1.99. Pay just like you do for PPV through your cable box.

(but knowing shaw, they would try to charge $5 a channel).

[ken0042]

For me- the problem isn't the bundling vs not bundling. I understand that the $10 I pay for HD doesn't cover the subscription to those channels that Shaw has to pay. What I don't get is why TV stations make Shaw et al pay them to show their channels?

Instead of charging Shaw based on how many people have the channel, make the channel free. Then Shaw can setup a tiered system that makes it inexpensive to have every channel. Now that most people have every channel, you will have more people watching any given show, and the stations can charge more for advertizing.

[sclitheroe]

Originally Posted by Matty81

They seem to be in a bit of a vicious circle right now where they are bleeding subscribers because of their content model and keep pushing the cost a bit higher to compensate, losing even more.

This couldn't be further from the truth. Shaw isn't bleeding customers at all.

June 30 2011, Third Quarter Financial & Operating Results:

Digital customers increased 87,092 to 1,595,619, and Internet and Digital Phone lines grew by 25,661 to 1,796,973 and 66,123 to 1,044,410, respectively. Basic and DTH were up 2,322 and 1,856 customers, respectively. During the quarter Shaw achieved several significant milestones including a record quarterly gain in Digital Phone and surpassing 1,000,000 Digital Phone lines.

I get the nerd rage over bundled cable, but I think nearly everyone here grossly overestimates the prevailing sentiment towards Shaw - most people don't care, and I'm willing to bet the average person would be less content paying for the 10 channels they asked for, than having 60 channels to flip through nightly. Don't underestimate the "more is better" mentality - it's exceedingly common, and exceptionally easy to market to.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by sclitheroe

I get the nerd rage over bundled cable, but I think nearly everyone here grossly overestimates the prevailing sentiment towards Shaw - most people don't care, and I'm willing to bet the average person would be less content paying for the 10 channels they asked for, than having 60 channels to flip through nightly. Don't underestimate the "more is better" mentality - it's exceedingly common, and exceptionally easy to market to.

Well put. There's an odd amount of bitterness for what stating what is almost certainly a fact, even if it doesn't describe everybody.

The transition shaw has to manage isn't from bundled to unbundled, but to content on demand via multiple devices. Probably screwed either way though.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by sclitheroe

This couldn't be further from the truth. Shaw isn't bleeding customers at all.

June 30 2011, Third Quarter Financial & Operating Results:

Here's the real results

The company reported consolidated revenue of $1.18 billion during the final quarter of the year, up 26% over the same period in 2010. Revenues for the entire 2011 fiscal year were $4.74 billion, up 28% from 2010.

http://www.digitalhome.ca/2011/10/in...ions-soars-15/

[nik-]

I hate their new bundles. Right now I get Spike and AMC in my regular old Digital TV lineup. In order to get them in their new setup I have to purchase two additional bundles.

It's prevented me from switching over my service, because if I have to download some shows, I'm going to download them all and just cancel my service.