Salman Rushdie has coined the term "behalfism." Think of it as "It's not what I want, it's what I think someone else wants." It's almost a worthless point of view. It's not unlike the Edsel market-research. Non-drivers thought the Edsel was just what others wanted. "If they did " something "I'd buy it for sure" is of value. Thinking that if they do something, somebody else would buy it (when you have no desire or interest) isn't 'second-guessing" it's "third-guessing." I get my Internet (and previously my telephone) from Cablemas, the local cable company at my apartment. I've previously tried their cable service, but I get quite a few channels DTV over the air. Now, if only we'd get on with the transition, I'd be able to get CBS at my apartment over the air. KFMB-DT vacated 55 to make way for MediaFlo and moved to channel 7. Unfortunately, that's co-channel with KABC-TV in Los Angeles, which, from my apartment is right behind KFMB-DT. So, I lost that signal for the duration due to NTSC-into-DTV interference. The alternative is to watch KCBS-DT in Los Angeles, but that's seasonably variable (a situation that I hope will improve when their DTV goes to channel 2. In the meantime, another displacement channel has temporarily used their DTV channel for something else closer to me. This happened about two months ago. I'm not whining here, but this phase of the DTV transition has caused me to lose CBS. I don't want to subscribe to DirecTV for one network . Telling cable companies what they have to do to appeal to other prospects is behalfism. Looking for research to support that viewpoint is another thing indeed . John Willkie _____ De: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] En nombre de dan.grimes@xxxxxxxx Enviado el: Thursday, July 10, 2008 8:40 AM Para: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Asunto: [opendtv] Re: Analysis: Broadcast's $1 Billion Pot of Gold Like I said...if my opinion really matters. I've always admitted I was a bit of an odd ball when it comes to media consumption. And I agree that a la carte might very well be a limited group of consumers...and it might not. Do you know of any research where a la carte and bundled packages went up against each other to determine how the pricing and consumption would land? (That isn't rhetorical, I'm curious) I don't understand the logic that because I don't subscribe to a MVPD that I can't understand or have any stake in distribution products or platforms. My arguments are for ethical, moral, philosophical and capital reasons. I would subscribe if I could purchase the media I want, so long as the media I receive and the money I pay is perceived as equitable. I am a potential customer so I would certainly think a business would want to hear what I would like. But I am also a citizen and think I have the right, no, the obligation, to participate when issues are of social importance. I'm not sure if you are saying it is only a business decision and not a social one. I would oppose that argument. Dan John Willkie <johnwillkie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent by: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 07/09/2008 10:08 AM Please respond to opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx To opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx cc Subject [opendtv] Re: Analysis: Broadcast's $1 Billion Pot of Gold Not unlike the market research for the Edsel. It tested well in focus groups, etc. The only problem is they didn't narrow the groups down to likely car buyers. It didn't fare well, as you may recall. Perhaps 50,000 were made, and Ford almost went out of business. John and Craig are cable customers. They have valid, experienced, and contrasting points of view. "Pushbutton automatic transmission in the steering wheel! Horse-collar grillework! Look at all that chrome!" Would you buy one? John Willkie -----Original Message----- From: dan.grimes@xxxxxxxx Sent: Jul 9, 2008 8:43 AM To: opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [opendtv] Re: Analysis: Broadcast's $1 Billion Pot of Gold I'm strongly with Craig on this issue, if my opinion really matters. And, as I have stated before, I have additional reasons for a la carte. John Shutt's points are well and valid, but it doesn't negate the other very useful reasons. And it doesn't negate the option of a bundled package. I wouldn't call it whining, but I wish more people cared about what media they are purchasing and what their family members were watching. Dan "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx> Sent by: opendtv-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 07/09/2008 08:21 AM Please respond to opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx To <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> cc Subject [opendtv] Re: Analysis: Broadcast's $1 Billion Pot of Gold Craig Birkmaier wrote: > If you add in the rest of the cost of extended basic cable U.S. > consumers are paying nearly $5 billion per month to watch TV > channels crammed full of ads. Quit whining about this, Craig. John Shutt gave you a perfectly valid explanation as top why things would not go as you think with a la carte. I know it will fall on deaf ears, because it has done so countless times in the past. So here's the real point. The vast majority of US households is perfectly willing to pay what they are paying. The obvious explanation being, they are not being charged enough. You know, like the price of gasoline until, PERHAPS, very recently. It was not high enough, if so many people were so overtly wasteful with it. Bert ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can UNSUBSC RIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways: - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways: - Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at FreeLists.org - By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word unsubscribe in the subject line.