Quote:
Originally Posted by Londonee
http://www.philly.com/philly/busines...-20170912.html
Comcast lost $16b in Market capitalization in just 3 days after it's latest report talked about losing 100,000 to 150,000 TV subs. It's a dying a business - for your market cap to live and die on it, is truly dangerous - it's only getting worse as more people switch how they consume TV.
In the long-run, they might be better served spinning the TV division off as a totally separate entity - and keeping Comcast as the ISP/Fiber/digital backbone/content creator that they kind of want to be. ISP is their true moneymaker anyways as once the lines are laid it's pure profit.
TV is just not worth it anymore if your company's value takes a massive plunge based solely on TV sub numbers.
|
I believe that the problem has a lot to do with the constantly escalating cost of cable TV! Although I was able to afford Comcast's Premium service which included 7 HBO channels, 5 Cinemax channels, 5 Showtime channels, and many Spanish speaking channels (please don't ask why, I'm a Spanish buff), when I learned that I could get 1000 channels for less money thru either Direct TV of Dish network, it made spending money with Comcast seem like I was getting fleeced by the company.
I think Comcast is a great cable company and its number one for a lot of reasons, but Comcast is actually a great cable company. It's not an Apple, which transformed itself from being a computer company to a major high tech company, a GM, which makes engines for generators as well as vehicles, and even has a mortgage company named GMAC, a Coca-Cola, which has numerous products, and once owned Columbia Pictures for a brief time, and even a company like Anheuser Busch. It's just the biggest cable company in America!
It's nice, but if the company wants brand name recognition like an AT&T or a Sony, it's going to have to evolve like Apple, or die a slow death like Sears and Kmart. I'm not sure what direction Comcast has in the future, but with many people preferring computers over TV, if Comcast doesn't evolve and compete, it might as well bite the dust like DuPont, a 200-year old company (even though the name still exists).
I don't think the new tower enhances the Philadelphia skyline in a positive manner because although it's the tallest tower, the roof seems slightly lower than the Comcast Center, the spire looks too superfluous, the design is too boxy nor is it elegant, and the amenities are a ripoff of the old ACC.
Speaking of the old ACC, that proposal was the best one Philly ever had and I'm afraid we'll never have that type of proposal during our lifetimes.FMC is fine, and the W Hotel is another great addition to the skyline, but building the ACC wouldn't just mean having a cutting edge tallest tower in Philadelphia, it meant attracting a new company like TD Bank, Black Rock, or better yet, GE!!! I'm not sure whether Phila is generating new businesses like it did from last decade, but the city feels stagnant, even though the current census claims that we're slightly growing in comparison to Chicago, which has an even healthier downtown core with a stagnant and in some sections like the West and.South Sides, declining populations.
Finally I don't believe that Philadelphia is as innovative as it was in the last century. For most of last century, Philadelphia was the "Workshop of the World". National Geographic called this city the "Next Great City", but despite that announcement, if you can't stabilize not just Center City, but North, West, Northwest, Northeast, South, and Southwest Phila with affordable housing, more supply of housing other than the common row home,strong business corridors, a transportation system that's affordable, and a constant stream of immigration, Philadelphia is going to be lumped with the Baltimores, the Clevelands, the St Louis, and the Detroits rather than the Bostons, the San Franciscos, the Atlantas, and the Miamis. And that's the truth!!!
Prev
....... So construction on the lantern is scheduled to start , when ....... 
)
Linear Mode
