OT: Why are TV studios so stupid?

[Yimboli]

I don't watch TV. I bought a Roland digital piano for less than my friend bought a huge plasma TV for. He also pays per month to sit in front of it and waste away... so basically he's paying more to develop himself less, while I learn a rare skill.

Drop cable and use the money for classes or guitar lessons or something... anything is better than network crap.

[Atrocities]

There isn't much to watch on the boobtube to justify the $80 a month most people here in the states pay for TV.

[Renegade 13]

Atrocities said:
There isn't much to watch on the boobtube to justify the $80 a month most people here in the states pay for TV.

You pay that much for TV down there? Ouch.

Up here, we pay something like $40 CDN per month for satellite TV. Way cheaper. However, it's tough finding something worth watching. If it wasn't for Stargate, BSG, various Star Treks, Hockey (!!), and the very few other shows I regularly watch, I'd give up on TV altogether.

[ToddT]

$40 CDN for satlite, That cost more more down here, too.
actually cable can be had for under $20 bucks US but, it doesn't get you much, as soon as you get into the regular services packages your looknig at $45 US to beyond $100 us.
and given whats on this these days.................
oh cable (not sure about Sat) bumb the more current/interesting material into the higher priced packages.

[Atrocities]

We pay more because we have greedy f***ing politicans who tac on fees, taxes, and useage costs three to four times each year. Hell the average cell phone now cost 40% in fees 60% for service now. Hell when I first had a cell phone, back in 90, I was paying $30.00 a month for 5 hours a month of phone time. Now its $65.00 for the same package. ALL FEES.

We even have politicans here in states, and in my state, that want to tack on more ISP fees, hell those have trippled in the last two years. My ISP service is $44.00 a month, but I pay $66.00 a month after all the taxes and state/federal fees.

Now they want to "fee" emails. WTF! Time to do some house cleaning! Unfortunetly that never works because you end up replacing the scumbags with even worse greedy scumbages in an endless on going election fruad game of replace the scumbag with an even worse scumbag.

But I degress. Ya we do pay way too much for Satellite.

[Suicide Junkie]

Might I suggest an alternative explanation?
Perhaps they are cancelling the good shows and adding lame ones to decrease expectations!
That way, they don't have to work hard finding and developing good shows, but still rake in the bucks because people still sit, and just channel surf.

[Captain Kwok]

There's really only one factor and that is the ratings (and to some degree, who makes up the audience). That is how the networks set their ad fees which is the major source of income for the network.

[Will]

Sorry to take the OT even more OT...

Well, that's the way pricing on "service" commodities works, where there is often a geographical monopoly. The price will always expand to the precise point that the market will bear. Even things like satellite TV and cellular phones, where there often is not a geographical monopoly, you get the same effects out of mandatory length service contracts. Because it would cost too much to switch to a competitor, few people ever do. And so, companies can increase charges right up to the point where they begin to lose customers. Same reason why Microsoft can charge $280 retail for Windows XP Professional ($140 OEM) and people still pay it; because the costs of training and getting equivalent software for a different platform are initially too high.

If it's any consolation on the cell phone costs, there will probably be a law passed sometime in the next few decades that requires wireless providers to open up their networks to competitors, and keep the charge for using a competitors network reasonable. Then, the cellular phone system would be more similar to long-distance service for land-lines, and there would be more direct competition, driving prices down. So, places like my old hometown in Pennsylvania, which has only one cellular provider, would be open to all providers, with the same resources devoted to coverage, and places like my current hometown, Los Angeles, would still have all the providers there, but the coverage would get better because the different networks become one network. Which also means no more needing to check with your friends to see who has the best reception in a particular spot, and no more finding out that your new apartment has zero reception for your service, but perfect reception for your friend's service.