I remember the first time I saw cable TV - it was in the early 70's. A lot of the reason for getting cable was for better (or any) reception plus some additional programming, such as HBO. Your cable bill reflected both the cost of distribution (i.e. the cable infrastructure) plus the cost of programming, such as HBO. Things are still pretty much the same. When you sign up for a TV service you are paying for distribution and programming costs. I never cared for the practice of bundling stations and having to pay for programming I never watched but that is for another thread. Fortunately, we have multiple choices for TV service in the Villages. At a minimum, you have Comcast, DirectTV, and Dish. In addition, you may also have access to Brighthouse and CenturyLink. Also, you can eliminate recurring monthly costs by using an over-the-air antenna. I don't think Comcast is really any different than the other sources of TV service. If you are unhappy with their service (or cost) you are free to find a better deal, as you pointed out. However, after switching to DirectTV, you may find you have the same issues after a year or so. You may have noticed that all TV service providers appear to have better deals for new subscribers than existing customers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pointer
 Wow, does anyone else remember that when cable TV was beginning? They were going to be commercial free and that's why you were going to pay for TV? Now you have to pay for free TV from them and there are more commercials then free TV has! I think that every person in the Villages who has Comcast should write them, and maybe some who were considering using them too, what they think of this business practice and will be finding an alternative asap. Lets inundate them with opinions. I can get Directv with so much more for my money. Geeze it's practically a no brainer to switch. |