Comments on: Bell solves TV crisis (not)

By: satellite tv comparison

satellite tv comparison — Wed, 06 Oct 2010 04:27:34 +0000

Its financial uselessness isn't the only flaw in Bell's Freesat plan, as Digital Home also points out.

By: CBC fee-for-carriage solution isn’t really one – Fagstein

CBC fee-for-carriage solution isn’t really one – Fagstein — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:51:48 +0000

[...] this sounds a bit familiar, it's because Bell thought up the same thing with cheap satellite. Both seem to ignore the fact that cheap is not free. Though it's unclear how much basic cable [...]

By: Fagstein

Fagstein — Fri, 01 May 2009 05:59:06 +0000

If they thought they could make money that way, they would do it in a heartbeat. But advertisers won't pay the higher rates, so you're left filling airtime with internal promos.

By: Jean Naimard

Jean Naimard — Fri, 01 May 2009 03:35:06 +0000

If the broadcasters can’t make money off advertising, why don’t they raise the rates??? It would not hurt to see car, beer and toilet-paper companies soaked more to show their moronic commercials anyways.

(This would also have the added benefit of raising the cost of cars, beer and toilet paper and thus discourage their use, too, for a greener planet).

By: Horonymous

Horonymous — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:09:03 +0000

Where traditional broadcasters do not want to install HD transmitters the TV Stations should be required to supply the hardware to people who request it to receive free TV signals via satellite.