1 of 1- RadioActive
- Moderator
Online! 
CRTC: More Than 66,000 Canucks Have Gone To $25 Skinny Cable
That's the headline of a release from the CRTC on Friday.
More than 66,000 Canadians have already signed up to the new basic TV package
There are several reasons the entire press offering is laughable.
1) I find it hard to believe that almost anyone signed up for these subpar packages which don't offer much and wind up costing subscribers at least $50 or more, thanks to the new need to "rent the box." And don't get me started on the ridiculous and insulting middle finger offered to the Commission - and the rest of us - by Bell (unwatched French channels, ignored CPAC-type outlets from across the country and not a single American network.)
2) Despite the trend toward cord cutting, there are several million cable/sat subscribers in this country. Citing a miniscule "66,000" as some kind of milestone is ludicrous.
3) The CRTC has badly bungled this entire thing, as most of us here figured they would. The fact they would put out such an absurd semi-self congratulatory bit of hokum with a subtext of, "see, we told you the public would go for it and we're protecting their interests," is mind boggling. They should be ashamed of themselves and instead, trying to ensure the companies adhere to the spirit of the change instead of patting themselves on the back for a job far from well done.
Last edited by RadioActive (April 15, 2016 11:37 am)
- ig
- Iain Grant
Offline
Re: CRTC: More Than 66,000 Canucks Have Gone To $25 Skinny Cable
As some here, myself included said when this was announced, there's a small (miniscule) but very vocal minority who demanded this.
in 2013 there were 10,780,000 Canadians who subscribed to cable/sat. (Latest # available from Stats Can.)
Even using those numbers, if 66,000 have signed up for 'skinny basic' that represents 0.6%.
1 half of 1 percent.
What a (Canadian) success story!
Meanwhile Rogers stopped their existing $19 'Digital basic' plan that had been around for ages, to accommodate the new CRTC mandated one. (Quite correctly).
Madness takes its toll. Please have exact change.
- Radiowiz
- Member
Offline
Re: CRTC: More Than 66,000 Canucks Have Gone To $25 Skinny Cable
ig wrote:
Meanwhile Rogers stopped their existing $19 'Digital basic' plan that had been around for ages, to accommodate the new CRTC mandated one. (Quite correctly).
Is it stopped? Or grandfathered?
RadioWiz & RadioQuiz are NOT the same person.
RadioWiz & THE Wiz are NOT the same person.
- radiokid
- Member
Offline
Re: CRTC: More Than 66,000 Canucks Have Gone To $25 Skinny Cable
My bill went down approx $15 dollars by moving to Skinny for our house... BUT that being said, there are channels that are WAY overpriced @ $6.95 when you can get them along with 17 others for $9.45. So we just don't subscribe to them at all.. Not sure how this benefits the channel owner.
A&E, CNN, TLC @ $6.95 each and $5.95 for CP24, or CBC News Network each is just too high...
All I see with this is the CRTC regulating prices of channels at some point or these channels failing unnecessarly. $4.95 at most for these channels is reasonable, with discounts for build your own bundles.
I long ended the view of "we get 1000000 channels for X", and moved to "we pay X for the channels we want and watch". To me, I rather pay and support those channels than get 1000000's I don't watch or want and throw money at them by default just to appear to get a deal... because actually you don't.
Last edited by radiokid (April 15, 2016 12:49 pm)
- ig
- Iain Grant
Offline
Re: CRTC: More Than 66,000 Canucks Have Gone To $25 Skinny Cable
Sorry, grandfathered for existing subs. N/A for new.
Meanwhile Rogers stopped their existing $19 'Digital basic' plan that had been around for ages, to accommodate the new CRTC mandated one. (Quite correctly).
Is it stopped? Or grandfathered?
Madness takes its toll. Please have exact change.
- radiokid
- Member
Offline
Re: CRTC: More Than 66,000 Canucks Have Gone To $25 Skinny Cable
Sorry, grandfathered for existing subs. N/A for new.
Meanwhile Rogers stopped their existing $19 'Digital basic' plan that had been around for ages, to accommodate the new CRTC mandated one. (Quite correctly).
Is it stopped? Or grandfathered?
Let's be clear here... The CRTC never said they had to offer a Skinny Basic package at $25 vs $19. It's UP TO A MAX of $25. If Rogers wanted to drop the $19 package, that's likely 100% on them. The CRTC had nothing to do with that one.
Last edited by radiokid (April 15, 2016 1:04 pm)
- Radiowiz
- Member
Offline
Re: CRTC: More Than 66,000 Canucks Have Gone To $25 Skinny Cable
Let's be clear here... The CRTC never said they had to offer a Skinny Basic package at $25 vs $19. It's UP TO A MAX of $25. If Rogers wanted to drop the $19 package, that's likely 100% on them. The CRTC had nothing to do with that one.
The logic might be, who is going to pay $25 if they can pay $19?
Zazeen is a strong example of your point being very true. They have extended their $9.99 skinny basic deal (it was supposed to expire March 31, 2016)...you still have to pay for a full year in advance to get the deal though.
(and do read the fine print carefully. They WILL bill you extra for the box monthly after that year)
Zazeen deal:
RadioWiz & RadioQuiz are NOT the same person.
RadioWiz & THE Wiz are NOT the same person.
- ig
- Iain Grant
Offline
Re: CRTC: More Than 66,000 Canucks Have Gone To $25 Skinny Cable
You are correct, but the $19 plan was built so that the numbers made sense. The CRTC mandated other 'must carry' channels which changed the price model for the original basic plan. Had Rogers maintained that, and included the additional 'must carry' channels, it would have cost them more to deliver the package than they could make carrying it. (all costs included obviously, not just the provider fees).
Sorry, grandfathered for existing subs. N/A for new.
Is it stopped? Or grandfathered?
Let's be clear here... The CRTC never said they had to offer a Skinny Basic package at $25 vs $19. It's UP TO A MAX of $25. If Rogers wanted to drop the $19 package, that's likely 100% on them. The CRTC had nothing to do with that one.
Madness takes its toll. Please have exact change.
- Old Codger
- Unregistered
Re: CRTC: More Than 66,000 Canucks Have Gone To $25 Skinny Cable
I haven't done it and won't. I work in slow motion. Priorities. TV choice is NOT a priority. But when I'm done I won't be taking their basic piece of poop package...or their phone service or their internet. They won't get 1 blinkin' cent from me. This new mask the CRTC has made them wear changes nothing. They're still all creeps and their time is up.
Betcha that's why there's only 66 grand...buying in so far. More are just preparing to totally opt OUT.
We'll bring these bitches to their knees.
- RadioActive
- Moderator
Online!
Re: CRTC: More Than 66,000 Canucks Have Gone To $25 Skinny Cable
I love the different ways this is being covered. It's truly amazing to read one story that proclaims skinny basic a success, while other sources interpret the same CRTC figures as a dismal failure.
Canadian Press: New, trimmed-down TV packages proving popular for many, says CRTC
Hollywood Reporter: Canada's Cable Unbundling Falls Short With "Skinny" TV Packages
Hmm.
"Proving popular."
"Fall[ing] short."
Can't be both.
Lipstick on a pig. I lean toward the latter.
What's that old expression from Samuel Butler? Figures never lie but liars often figure.
Last edited by RadioActive (April 15, 2016 4:18 pm)
- •
Thread Starter- ig
- Iain Grant
Offline
Re: CRTC: More Than 66,000 Canucks Have Gone To $25 Skinny Cable
Lipstick on a pig. I lean toward the latter.
As do I. The CP article isn't as much reporting as it is re-writing a press release. Reminds me of the new folks in the newsroom that used to consider CNW the 'business wire' 
. Maybe someone at CP didn't get the memo .
Madness takes its toll. Please have exact change.
- RadioActive
- Moderator
Online!
Re: CRTC: More Than 66,000 Canucks Have Gone To $25 Skinny Cable
I noticed a cutline link to the same CP article currently (as of 4:15 pm Friday) on the Star's front page (under the "Don't Miss" header) that's really, really, REALLY stretching it.
Here's what it says:
"Canadians loving skinny-basic TV packages." .
Wow. I don't think even the most ardent $25 subscriber would go that far. Shame on whoever wrote that at Canada's biggest newspaper. It's not just misleading. It's 100% wrong.
Last edited by RadioActive (April 15, 2016 4:20 pm)
- •
Thread Starter- ig
- Iain Grant
Offline
Re: CRTC: More Than 66,000 Canucks Have Gone To $25 Skinny Cable
Pathetic journalism, but then again, it's not really 'journalism' per se. This is as good an example as any of what irks people about the 'new' media. Funnily enough, it's also exactly what used to irk newsroom staff. People grabbing the BN summary and just reading it verbatim. Same thing is happening now, possibly worse, in that it's now a computer that tries to create the 'headline'.
Canadians flock to sign up for new skinny-basic TV packages
More than 66,000 consumers have signed up to the new basic TV packages in five weeks.
I noticed a cutline link to the same CP article currently (as of 4:15 pm Friday) on the Star's front page (under the "Don't Miss" header) that's really, really, REALLY stretching it.
Here's what it says:
"Canadians loving skinny-basic TV packages." .
Wow. I don't think even the most ardent $25 subscriber would go that far. Shame on whoever wrote that at Canada's biggest newspaper. It's not just misleading. It's 100% wrong.
Last edited by ig (April 15, 2016 5:16 pm)
Madness takes its toll. Please have exact change.