Reply 
Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    TheDickWard is offline HDD Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    2,281

    Default Comcast Loses Just 17,000 Subscribers in Fourth Quarter of 2011


    Considering that the company lost 460,000 subscribers in the year, that number is incredibly small.

    http://www.homemediamagazine.com/cab...ss-17000-26428
  2. #2
    Krawk's Avatar
    Krawk is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    2,315
    Once again, you can't blame the cable company for trying to remain afloat. Tv service in my house from diretctv is close to $80 for two rooms. Just last week we lost Cloo and if we want it back we need to buy the next tier up for another $8. All the next tier offers is the Encore channels, and now Cloo. Getting that tier is the TOP tier before having HBO/Cinemax/etc so I already have a very high tier. The tv networks are getting greedy with their contract negotiations and so, providers sometimes have to absorb some of the cost, other times have to raise their prices to keep the same margin. People's anger are misplaced, the tv networks are what are killing the tv networks. As much as I hate streaming services, at least with them the PQ is similar, no channel logos or cutesy distractions and no commercials.
    Last edited by Krawk; 02-18-2012 at 09:37 AM.
  3. #3
    fredreed is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    78

    Default Comcast loses just 17000 subscribers


    I could care less about how many customers comcast lost. I don't like comcast because they offer terrible services to all their customers. They can't offer any decent programming at all and yet everyone thinks that comcast is such a great company. Comcast is not a great company in fact comcast is the worst cable company in the world today simply because of their high fees and lack of tv programming they offer. I had comcast and got rid of their service because they stink with all of their services. They wouldn't be a bad company If they had offered better programming and cut down on their high fees and upgraded their cable services they have.
  4. #4
    Badger3920's Avatar
    Badger3920 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    17,705
    That's not true at all. I've had directv, and I currently have time warner. They both were shitty for different reasons. I have comcast at my home in the SF Bay area - and of all my services, I prefer that. They have free 'On Demand' tv stuff which is basically a selection of current tv shows and movies which you can watch for absolutely free. Very helpful for when you miss dvr'ing a show, and it happens to be On Demand (which happens more than you'd think).

    They charge probably about the same as the other services, and they provide a bit more. DirecTV has gone to a 'used car salesman' feeling when you call them up to set up service. That really turned me off, so I hung up and went with Time Warner here in new york.
    Currently Playing: Uncharted 3, Zelda: Skyward Sword
    Back Burner: LBP2, LA Noire
    Just finished: Anno 2070 (PC)
    Home Theater: Panasonic PT-ae4000u, 110" Carada Brilliant White Screen, PS3
    Gaming PC: I5 2500k, GTX 670, 8GB Gskill 1600 RAM, 64 GB Patriot SSD, Samsung BD Drive
  5. #5
    COLD_COBRA_ is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    69
    does diretv and time have a similar service to on-demand?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.1 PL1