Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site decwrl.DEC.COM Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-exit26!rosen From: rosen@exit26.DEC (Barry Rosen) Newsgroups: net.consumers Subject: Cable Television Message-ID: <249@decwrl.DEC.COM> Date: Fri, 3-Jan-86 14:18:23 EST Article-I.D.: decwrl.249 Posted: Fri Jan 3 14:18:23 1986 Date-Received: Sat, 4-Jan-86 07:02:32 EST Sender: daemon@decwrl.DEC.COM Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Lines: 80 I am writing this because I: 1. am outraged at what I see happening 2. hope that someone else has had a similar experience and found a way to counter this. BACKROUND: About 2 years ago, the town in which I live signed an agreement with a cable company to give them the "franchise" to "wire" the town and offer cable TV service to the residents. [Since that time, the FCC has de-regulated cable TV and stated that cable television is not a monopoly and therefore there can be competition. This statement by itself raises a number of arguements which should be left for another discussion.] In the agreement, the cable company agreed to waive the connection fees for all subscribers until a certain date and to a set fee schedule for a 2 year period which would commence when the cable company had completed a number items (among these was wiring of the entire town and to install a public access station with equipment in the high school). The services offered to subscribers were a BASIC rate which ran about $ 4.50 per month and gave you access to all of the local stations including those of NH and RI (we're in MA) plus CNN Headline News and a few others. The SUPER CABLE rate (which required installation of a decoder was only about $ 7.50/mo and this added a number of other stations including MTV, ESPN, CNN, etc. You also needed to purchase this service if you intended to purchase any "pay" channels like HBO, Showtime, etc. Still, I thought that these rates were very reasonable and the quality of the reception was very good to excellent. THE PROBLEM: News has just "leaked" that a notice will be sent to all subscribers with the February invoices that there will be a rate change. The town heard of this and some selectmen are arguing that the 2 year rate moratorium is still not up and some are stating that the period has not even begun. The cable company's position is that they are now de-regulated and can charge what the market will bear and anyway, the 2 year period is up. This, by itself, would not greatly upset me in that the timing could probably be worked out by rational people. There are 2 things that are particularly disturbing to me: o ATTITUDE: The company states that since there is now competition, consumers can shop around if they do not like the rates which they are being charged. They cite the FCC deregulation order. I can not believe that either the cable company or the FCC can seriously believe that once a cable company has "wired" an area that another company will try to parallel wire it and compete. It seems to me that the labor rate and cost of materials continues to rise! o AMOUNT: The rates for the first two levels of service (don't include any pay channels) are going up 87%. Nice when you don't have any competition but the government says you can buy from anyone! This cable company is expected to do similar things in other towns in which they have had franchise rights. I also have to believe that cable companies (like others) talk with each other and that other companies have done similar things in other areas or will soon be doing so. I guess I naively expected the rates we were being charged to remain low and then gradually rise with other things in the economy or that there would be some sort of regulation to keep what IS A MONOPOLY from raising their rates an unreasonable amount. Perhaps the cable company does need that much of a raise to remain profitable. However it seems that there is no method (and maybe there should not be one) to determine or regulate (such a terrible word these days) how profitable (profit vs. ripoff) they should be. Has anyone out there in NETland encountered a similar situation? Am I looking at the situation too much as a consumer and not enough as the businessperson should? Have you any ideas on what can and should be done (assuming that I don't just want to drop the cable service which is needed in our area to get decent reception)? Barry (semi-retired activist)