Argentine President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner

The Argentine government has a solution to stop the skyrocketing of cable television rates in the country: it regulates them.  Now the country’s Secretary of Commerce Guillermo Moreno has ordered Cablevision SA, one of the country’s largest media companies, to freeze basic cable rates at 116 Argentine pesos ($27US) for 2012.

The cable company won a 7 pesos rate hike last September, but there were indications further rate hikes were forthcoming.  Argentine President Cristina Kirchner has engaged in a long-running feud with several large Argentine conglomerates over what she feels is their abuse of market power.

Kirchner has specifically targeted super-sized Grupo Clarín, Cablevision’s parent company, for its relentless rate hikes.  The conglomerate now earns close to two-thirds of its revenue from selling cable TV and broadband Internet.

Kirchner considers corporate monopoly control of broadband to be especially dangerous for the Argentine economy, and her administration is seeking to force Grupo Clarín to divest itself of its broadband business with the passage of several media laws.

Cablevision defends its rate increases, noting Argentina’s inflation rate is currently as high as 25%.  But government officials have the power to suspend or rollback rate increases it determines are unfair or come as a result of Cablevision’s market power.

The $27 a month Cablevision subscribers currently pay for basic cable buys a comparably-sized cable package that North Americans pay more than double that amount to receive:

A-la-carte cable: Still not on Rogers' menu

Carol Jameson simply can’t afford to spend $70 a month for cable television any longer.  Although Canada’s economy is doing better than some, Jameson’s husband recently had to endure a pay cut, and the costs of raising their two teenage children are not getting any lower.  The London, Ont. Rogers Cable customer ran several kitchen table meetings to discuss what expenses could be cut from the family budget.  Her teenage son and daughter targeted the family’s landline telephone — an archaic curiosity of the past for today’s cell-phone-obsessed youth, and cable-TV, which they saw as increasingly irrelevant.

“Just don’t touch the Internet connection,” Carol was advised.

Despite concerns from her sports-addicted husband, Jameson decided to start shopping around, and definitely decided the days of their landline was over.  In her neighborhood, “shopping around” meant choosing from Rogers Cable or a satellite TV provider.  Bell’s Fibe — fiber to the neighborhood — service was not up and running in her part of London.

“I had settled on a basic satellite package and keeping Rogers’ broadband and called the cable company to share the bad news,” Carol tells Stop the Cap! “But when I tried to cancel, I was transferred to someone who said I could stay and pick and choose only the channels I wanted to watch and pay for.”

Carol was shocked Rogers had a solution for her high cable bill that it never bothered to share until she tried to cancel.

“You can’t find a thing about this deal online or even on the phone with Rogers’ customer service, and who would think to ask after years of getting dozens of channels we never watch,” Jameson says.

Carol was being pitched Rogers’ new “Pick and Pay” service, currently undergoing a five month trial in the London area.

“I was offered the service until March 2012, after which I was advised to call Rogers back and discuss my options after the trial ends, if it ends,” Jameson tells us.

Rogers’ “Pick and Pay” is a modified a-la-carte suite of offerings.  It does not allow customers to pick and choose only the channels they wish.  It instead asks customers to sign up for a $20 basic cable package containing local broadcasters and certain other channels Canadian telecommunications regulators want all Canadians to have access to, and several channels Rogers wants their customers to have (home shopping, The Fireplace, Aquarium, and Sunset Channels, etc.)  Beyond that, customers can choose from mini-packages of Canadian superstations, U.S. broadcast stations, and digital music.  Customers then select 15, 20, or 30 channels of their choosing ranging in price from $26.38-$33.48 per month.

“It’s better than $70 a month, but not by too much,” Carol says.

Carol and her husband decided to consider the offer, but found an exact list of channels hard to come by.

“That’s not a problem limited to me,” Carol reports. “The Globe & Mail featured Rogers’ new cable package and the customer in that case had to obtain a photocopied list of channel choices because Rogers didn’t have one online.”

Carol ended up with the 20 channel add-on package and the U.S. network station suite, which runs $28.41 and $3, respectively.  That means her cable TV bill dropped to $52 a month, just over $22 a month less.

Rogers' scarce photocopied channel listing for their "Pick and Pay" package, obviously removed from an employee's three-ring binder.

“But here is where Rogers gets you by your pocketbook,” Carol warns. “You have to take Rogers’ phone service with the deal, so now the landline is back, although they charge less than Bell.”

Jameson also notes these prices do not include mandatory extras:

• $4.49 – Digital terminal rental (per TV)
• $2.99 – Digital service fee
• $0.70 – Local Programming Improvement Fund Fee
• + G.S.T. (taxes)

“So much for the savings,” Carol says.

The Globe & Mail speculates the Rogers’ trial is rigged to convince Canadian regulators there is little interest in a-la-carte cable, at least the way Rogers has packaged it (and kept it hidden from public view):

In September, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission said that it had received complaints from consumers about being forced to pay for too many channels they do not watch, and that it expects cable and satellite companies to change that. The CRTC ordered all TV providers to report back by April on what actions they have taken to give subscribers more choice.

But cable and satellite executives have told the CRTC in hearings that there is no consumer demand for cheaper, “skinny basic” packages that offer fewer channels at lower cost than today’s basic TV packages. And some think that Rogers will use the London example to tell the CRTC that there isn’t much demand for the product.

Customers like the Jameson family might end up unwittingly proving Rogers’ point.

“After all of the extras, we rejected the plan and were all ready to switch to satellite and keep the broadband, but at the last minute Rogers offered us new customer pricing on their standard package for a year if we agreed to stay, and we did,” Carol tells us.  “A-la-carte cable is exactly what we need, but this isn’t it.  Maybe that is why Rogers keeps it a secret.”

Besides sports, the biggest challenge for cord-cutters is to find access to 24-hour news channels they give up when they cancel pay television service.  While cable news often doesn’t actually spend much time on “news” when breaking stories are few and far-between, when something serious does happen, cord-cutters looking for live coverage can and do miss access to news networks.

But now a New York startup, RadixTV, has a solution for news junkies: Rtv.

Yesterday, the company launched a package of four cable news networks — Bloomberg, CNBC, CNBC World, and MSNBC streamed live 24 hours a day for $14.99 a month.

That’s a steep price for four channels, of which MSNBC is arguably the most important.  The company plans to expand to 10 channels in the future, including CNN, Fox News, and international news networks like BBC World, France 24 and Al Jazeera English that American cable companies routinely ignore.

Kaul

Rtv is pitched primarily to Wall Street — financial firms, brokerages, and investment businesses that want access to continuous business news but don’t need a traditional cable package.  In fact, the package is technically only supposed to be sold to business customers, but anyone can sign up if they say they are stock traders, accountants, investors, etc.

Stop the Cap! sampled Rtv this morning and found the service to work well with our broadband connection, although at times crawling news and stock prices found at the bottom of the screen on some channels seemed less smooth than they could be.  It occasionally was distracting.  MSNBC was the most compelling channel in the lineup, although we’d love to see international news channels even more.  But $15 a month is still a high price to pay.

The company’s CEO, Bhupender Kaul, worked for Time Warner Cable for nearly two decades, and believes the future of cable TV is likely to be Internet-based, with programming sold in niche packages like his.  True a-la-carte may be too unwieldy for providers to pull off, but selling groups of channels together might not.  Still, Kaul seems intent on not aggravating the industry as much as earlier cord-cutting online viewing services, which have all since been sued out of existence.  Local broadcast and general interest programming does not come with Rtv.  While a six figure-salaried Wall Street banker won’t mind $15 a month, you might.

Further reading: In New Web TV Service, A Glimpse of the Future

Cable subscribers paying ever-increasing television bills for hundreds of channels they never watch may find some relief if Comcast decides its experiment in “a-la-carte” cable-TV is a success.

The company is testing a new way of selling service that delivers a basic package of channels for a lower price and then offers customers bouquets of add-on channels sold in “theme packs” for $10 apiece.

Comcast is testing what it calls MyTV Choice in parts of Connecticut, Massachusetts, Vermont and Charleston, South Carolina, and plans to expand it to the Seattle area soon.

Here’s how MyTV Choice works:

Customers start with a basic package of channels that Comcast calls “Get Started” ($24.95) or “Get Started Plus,” which sells for $44.95 a month.

What differentiates the two options are the networks they contain.  Inexpensive cable networks turn up in Get Started — A&E, Discovery, C-SPAN, Animal Planet, Daystar, Food Network, home shopping, and The Weather Channel are among the 32 channels that accompanies a basic package of local channels.

Get Started Plus includes all of those networks plus sports — the budget-busting networks that help keep cable bills growing.  ESPN and other regional sports channels are included in the more expensive package.

Missing from the basic package of channels are kids shows, news, movies, and niche networks.  That’s where Comcast’s “Choice” packs come into play.  Customers can add a 19-channel News & Info pack, 31-channel Entertainment & Lifestyle pack, 16-channel Movie pack, and/or an 11-channel Kids pack for $10 each.

That’s where the “choice” ends.  Customers cannot skip the basic channel package to select only one of the theme packages, individual channels are not for sale, and anywhere outside of Charleston, customers also have to buy phone and Internet service from Comcast. HD also costs extra.

So much for a lower bill.

In fact, Comcast sells a digital cable package incorporating a full lineup of basic cable channels for just under $60.  If your family loves sports, has kids, and needs news channels, sticking with the digital cable package is actually cheaper than MyTV Choice.  That’s because the latter will require a $44.95 base package, plus three theme packs for an additional $30 a month.

Comcast denies their experimental a-la-carte package has anything to do with cord-cutting Internet viewers.

“It’s more or less responding to feedback from customers that they want more choice,” Comcast spokesman Bill Ferry told the Post & Courier.

While Ferry and others argue the pay-per-channel is not economically feasible, Christopher C. King, a telecom analyst for Stifel Nicolaus in Baltimore told the newspaper that is the trend.

“Certainly the industry’s moving more toward an a la carte model,” King said.

Theme-packs are not a new concept for some pay television viewers.  In the 1980s and 1990s, consumers owning large 6-to-12 foot satellite dishes routinely encountered the channel bouquet concept.  Customers would purchase a basic package and then select from a dozen or more mini-tiers, usually made up of networks owned by one company.  Want TBS and TNT?  Turner Broadcasting sold an add-on with those two channels.  Wanted a superstation package?  Channels uplinked by cable companies like TCI from Denver could be purchased as a small package.  So could stations like WSBK in Boston, WWOR and WPIX in New York, KTVT in Dallas and KTLA in Los Angeles.

Comcast has “simplified” things with a much smaller set of choices.  But that also dramatically limits any potential savings.

The concept of a-la-carte cable horrifies cable companies and their Wall Street shareholders, because a true “pay-per-channel” offer would dramatically cut the average revenue earned per subscriber if customers took a hatchet to the bloated channel packages most customers receive today.

Cable operators have resisted the concept because every channel would have to be encrypted to sell individually, billing would become more complicated, and the business model of niche-oriented networks supported by more popular fare would end.  That’s why programmers hate the idea as well.  While A&E, TNT, and CNN would have no trouble surviving, networks like Current TV, TV One, Hallmark, Cloo, and LOGO probably would not.

More importantly, many subscribers might find savings elusive from a-la-carte, because the most expensive cable programming networks also happen to be among the most popular.  ESPN and Fox News Channel, for example, have dramatically increased their rates to cable companies, who helpfully pass them along to you.  But if cable operators suddenly stripped those networks out of basic packages, while leaving the much cheaper networks together in broad-based theme packages like “lifestyle and entertainment,” subscribers may howl in protest or accuse the cable operator of playing politics.

It gets even harder when the cable companies selling the big packages of channels customers never watch also happen to own some of the networks found within those packages.  Comcast shareholders may not like the cable side of the business kicking lucrative NBC-owned and operated cable networks like The Weather Channel, USA, E!, Cloo, and other owned networks to a-la-carte Siberia.  Every cable subscriber pays for Cloo and E! today.  How many will choose to pay for those networks under an “a-la-carte” model is an open question.

Only two cable operators have expressed an interest in switching to a true, a-la-carte model to date — Suddenlink and Mediacom — both small, regional players that have no programming interests and lack sufficient buying power to score the kinds of discounts available to companies like Comcast and Time Warner Cable — discounts they can have if they agree to keep as many channels bundled in one digital cable package as possible.

Just over one year ago, Stop the Cap! introduced readers to Sezmi, a cable-TV alternative that delivered a package of selected cable networks, on-demand movies, video podcasts, YouTube content and local broadcast stations with a 1TB DVR set top box for $19.99 a month. Subscribers that decided to forgo the cable networks paid even less — $4.99 a month for service.

But no more.

As of this morning, Sezmi has discontinued its service, leaving customers with a nearly-worthless set top DVR box they spent $149.99 to acquire, and a number of questions about the company’s sudden change of direction.

The company issued a statement telling customers it has ceased monthly billing and giving customers until later this year to use some of the features Sezmi operates in-house:

We regret to inform you that Sezmi is discontinuing its consumer service. As of Monday, September 26, 2011, you will no longer be able to view or record broadcast TV programming through your Sezmi System. However, you will still be able to view movies and shows you have already saved to your Sezmi media recorder. To help ease the transition, you may also rent movies and shows if available at no charge from Sezmi’s On Demand catalog through November 1, 2011.

Why do you have to discontinue your consumer service?
Sezmi has changed its business focus to providing our product and technology platform to service providers, internationally and in the U.S., who are interested in providing broadband video services to their customers. As a result, we are no longer supporting our direct-to-consumer service.

What does this mean for me?
You will no longer be billed for Sezmi service. As of September 26th, you will no longer be able to utilize the programming guide and your digital media recorder will no longer operate as a recorder. You will be able to view movies and shows you have already saved to your recorder and YouTube access will not be affected. Between now and November 1st, you may rent any movies or shows at no charge to you. After November 1, Sezmi’s On Demand catalog will no longer be available but you will be able to use your Sezmi system to view all programming you have saved to the media recorder.

No Service After Sept. 26, 2011 didn't make the list.

What it also means is customers are stuck with a proprietary DVR box that won’t work with other services.

Sezmi’s business model was most operational in the Los Angeles market, where it leased unused spectrum from several LA-area television stations to carry its lightweight cable package.  In other markets, Sezmi simply wedded over the air digital free television stations with its online lineup of on-demand programming and charged $4.99 a month to watch.  It was never a compelling offer outside of Los Angeles, and even in that city, trouble brewed when Sezmi discontinued the cable package in December.

Among the difficulties Sezmi encountered:

1. Finding cooperative local broadcasters willing to lease unused digital spectrum to Sezmi proved to be a difficult proposition.  Broadcasters are zealously guarding the frequencies they control now and do not want to get into long-term contracts with third parties.  Network owned stations in major cities may have already committed significant spectrum to their own sub-channels and other projects, or want to hold them in reserve for future use.  Besides, why lease spectrum to a company for a cable package large networks could theoretically build themselves.
2. Sezmi lacked access to many popular cable channels, notably ESPN and HBO.  It’s difficult to get consumers to drop a cable or telco-TV subscription in favor of one that is limited to two dozen cable channels, some of which were hardly deal-sealers.  Efforts to move cable channel programming to online distribution were met with difficulty because content owners increasingly want a piece of the action.  Deep pockets are required to sustain video streaming businesses.
3. Consumers never really understood the product and were not convinced to choose it over better known alternatives that included satellite TV.

Sezmi’s new focus on working with larger players could meet with some success, but Sezmi’s best chances of all could be developing the technology for ethnic audiences or other narrowcast opportunities where the lack of a hundred plus channel cable package would not be a factor.