One part of it is retransmission fees. Cable channels charge an arm and a leg because they can and broadcast OTA TV networks charge a fee as well even though their signal is free with an antenna. It just gets more and more expensive as a result as long as there are customers who can tolerate it.
Comment on YouTube TV, which costs $73 a month, agrees to end “$600 less than cable” ads
drdiddlybadger@pawb.social 11 months ago
The fuck? What’s the point of it can’t be cheaper.
guywithoutaname@lemm.ee 11 months ago
1024_Kibibytes@lemm.ee 11 months ago
Well, you need a router or access points instead of a cable box. And you can stream it over Wi-Fi. Yeah, you can stream it over Wi-Fi. That’s why this is vaguely better than regular cable TV.
wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 11 months ago
So, it costs more because it requires less dedicated hardware?
Of course, how did I not see it before
JiraiyaIsNoLyah@sh.itjust.works 11 months ago
Back a few years ago when I had Verizon, I was able to stream via the Verizon app. But then sling came along and gave me the option to choose channels that I wanted AND have DVR for only $50. If it starts creeping back up then I will probably just go back to cable. I already have internet through them anyway 🤷🏿♂️
calewerks@fanaticus.social 11 months ago
I went back to cable and got an old cablecard and networked tuner. No rental fees for a box, and I can stream it wherever without checking in or dealing with location restrictions, and my DVR is still mine even if I leave and subscribe to something else.