Despite Promises That Franchise Reform Would Lower TV Rates, The Opposite Has Happened
from the so-much-for-that-theory dept
In pushing for franchise reform, one of the key arguments made was that adding competition would lower prices -- which is not a ridiculous assumption at a high level. However, as Broadband Reports is now noting, that's not what's actually happening. It points out how AT&T, which benefited massively from said franchise reform, has continually raised the prices on U-Verse, and there's also been a similar corresponding increase in prices of cable TV, contrary to the promises.
All that said, I'm not ready to claim that franchise reform was a mistake. I agree that the claims of telco supporters appears to have been bunk, but that's to be expected. The real problem was that with basic franchise reform, we didn't get significant competition, but limited competition from companies who are still using regulatory capture to enable higher prices.
I think the real turning point on pay TV prices (contrary to the claims of some) won't come due to franchise reform, but as more people ditch pay TV altogether and cut that cord to go internet-only.