cord cutting, cash saving and technology

It sounds like a 3-guys-walk-into-a bar-intro; seemingly disparate things that shouldn’t work but somehow do.

After years of being in a ridiculous and dysfunctional relationship with Rogers I finally got fed up and cut the cable last fall.  It’s been a steep acceptance curve.  I will admit I would look at what movie I might get to watch on a Saturday night for quite some time, although if I’m really honest, the choice wasn’t that amazing.  I haven’t gone completely cold turkey but I’m planning to switch ISP’s and because my phone is with another larger telecom that is named after a bell, I may conceivably be Rogers free.

Fortunately ‘cord cutting’ is a pretty geeky endeavour and there’s nothing the geek community likes better than to explain how they did what they did, and since the internet is their mother-ship, well finding info wasn’t all that hard.  Granted long winded technical discussions of UHF, megahertz and how to assemble your own antenna were largely lost on me.  But the basics were simple; you need an antenna, a sweet spot, some height, patience and presto, free TV.  What it boils down to is realizing that this isn’t the be-all-end-all of entertainment but it’ll get you the goods. Mostly.  

Toronto is geographically ideal for over the air antennas due to its concave bowl shape and because of the proximity to the US chances are you’ll get a Buffalo station or two, but not necessarily all the time and probably not during a storm, mostly.  Height is to your advantage, so if you live in a tower, you’ll do better, but my ground floor apartment, due to the lack of nearby tall buildings does OK too.  And lastly remember the old ‘Fox viewing positions’ (yes I watched Married with Children), my experience is that these so-called flat omni-directional antenna’s have a very different definition of ‘omni’ than I understand it to be.  Needless to say moving your antenna is necessary.  Fortunately it’s the size of piece of printer paper so as long as it’s not mounted this is pretty easy.

What did this all get me?  Well for $45 and a lot of time - don’t get me started on many trips to Future Shop due to their policy to always sell the customer the most expensive thing they have to offer – I save about $65 a month in cable fees of which I paid for about 300 channels I never watched.  In my opinion, if you’re not watching sports, paid cable isn’t for you.  And yes if you really want to watch what you want to watch you need some sort of streaming set up.  But I need baby steps.  Plus I have a really prohibitive Internet allowance for the moment so we make do with what is on and binge watching titles borrowed from the library.

I started this post because I really hate Rogers and I’m so close to ending our relationship, ideally forever, that I wanted to brag it up.  But let me be clear, I like watching TV and cord cutting isn’t for everyone.  There’s not a lot of selection, there’s no PVR (well you can purchase an OTA PVR but I haven’t) and you’re back to watching things when they are on, or not at all, or later, via streaming.  In the midst of waiting for my new computer to arrive so I can connect everything up to the TV, CRTC announces that they’re about to make some changes to cable TV in Canada, so we’ll see what they’ve come up with, soon.

Bottom line, cable companies are scrambling.  Millennial’s, and younger Gen Y aren’t even starting with cable.  In fact a recent article (I can’t remember where I saw it) stated that TV’s aren’t really a mainstay of dorm rooms anymore.  These generations stream on their computers or use Netflix.  I don’t know the stats on Gen X and the Boomers, but I’d guess they skew slightly higher on cable usage with some cord cutting as time goes on, or their kids set them up as the case may be.

If you’re paying attention, cable’s trying hard to keep you tuned in.  More American shows, more ‘features’ that were never available in cable, attempts at exclusive programming to keep people lured in, but is it a losing battle?  I assume so.  I also believe there’s opportunity to change the business model.  On demand models like Crave and Shome, if it was not required to also have a $40 a month cable package could be enticing.  But they’re not offered.

So what was my point?  Well first off, get stuffed Rogers.  The cord cutting revolution is fully underway, as in; I’m way late to the game.  Internet is on its way to being considered a utility and it is changing our ways.  Smart is the new sexy, although we do have to watch out for those eavesdropping TV’s.  

The news came this afternoon and it was rather anti-climactic.  A so-called ‘skinny’ option that will offer less and cost less; and a pick-and-pay plan which will end up costing you more, available for you in just 18 short months.

so i was wrong - not really a post

Target is out. Turns out treating Canada like a podunk backwater instead of the geographically challenging but sophisticated market it is didn't go well. I really thought they'd stick it out, proving that I really don't understand these mass-market general merchandise retailers.

Also Tilley. Not out, but who knows what this will become. While I'm definitely not in their target market, it's always tough to see a great Canadian success story come to some sort of end.

"and a little of that human touch" (springsteen lyrics)

It’s 2015.  We’re in the future of the movies of (some of) our youths, as in Back to the Future was set in 2015. Blade Runner's date is rounding the corner. So while we collectively look to see what fiction imagined, we find ourselves living some innovations that weren’t imagined, or perhaps were not imagined the way they manifested. We do not have driverless cars, but cars that park themselves are here, and Unattended Train Operation (driverless) transit is already in use. 

So while technology continues forward, often the most sophisticated algorithm in the world still doesn’t quite get it.  While I’m always awed that the PC Plus program has a pretty good idea when I need more popcorn, a product I don’t consume on a cyclical basis, there are times when a little decorum and humanity is needed.

The recent episode with Uber comes to mind. In the middle of a rash hostage taking in Australia, Uber’s booking system noticed an unexpected uptake in cab usage – you know from people running for their lives – and the system’s usage metrics kicked in and started upping the cab fees. An innocent enough reaction given circumstances that fall within normal range, but, clearly, in this case a place where a touch of good old human metrics would ‘get it’. Similarly, but quite so crudely, this year’s Facebook ‘year in review’ feature took posts with the most “Likes” and used those posts to create a snapshot of a person’s year. The part the coders failed to get was the sometimes, in a method of support, people - myself included -  will Like a post that isn’t necessarily positive, but in a show of support, say when a goal isn’t reached, or a loved one passes on. 

I consider myself an amateur enthusiast of analytics and the part that I find the most interesting is the story part of the analysis, but in both telling and creating stories, options have to be considered. We all know computer code doesn’t do so well with grey concepts. And truthfully, it’s almost impossible to consider all angles, a human fault, but consideration to how people act and use features should be part of the story here. The Uber example was almost impossible to predict; the idea was the increase cab fees during peak demand times, like the end of Saturday night, or after a major sporting event, or even more vindictively during a transit shutdown or major storm. A concept, not loved, but understood by anyone who tried to rent a car over a holiday or book a hotel room for a major event. But the Facebook situation isn’t that far of a reach, and yes the post is editable, but the articles I found mentioned instances where a loved one who had passed away, was featured in this auto generated post, and understandably was startling to those users.

Most of these systems are pretty ubiquitous. Like the popcorn, or the Amazon recommendations, or that fact that certain government bodies that might be watching my consumption habits in order to be keyed in to my potentially devious plots… unfortunately what they found out is that I buy a lot of makeup and eat a decent amount of pizza. Revelatory, I know!

I had a tersely written, complain-y description of the automated job search filters currently in use. Needless to say, since I’m actively looking for work, perhaps, a bit of human review might make the entire process just a little more fruitful, for both parties.

Similarly trying to track down an answer to a question on a government form used to be a tedious task of being puzzled, reading complicated language on a website and sometimes in a fit of exasperation, calling to listen to options on an automated phone system. Although my last few interactions with government were very human indeed, I was assigned a person who handled my case, answered my questions, and who I talked to each time I needed information. And believe me when I say, it’s rather unsettling to get straightforward, logical answers from your government.

As we mature into this technology - and we all use it. Algorithms suggest what we might like on shopping sites, on movie sites, when browsing for the next thing to read perhaps we, the royal we, will get better at considering situations that may not fit the norm, and require intervention. However when thinking in evolutionary terms, we humans may be the weak link, but I think we’re still best equipped; after all our gray matter considers all the colours.

and the winners are... - not really a post

CBC announces the top marketing blunders of 2014, and in the video part (sadly not the printed version), Target Canada is called out for failing, apologizing for its failure but not actually doing anything to fix the failure (at about 1:42).  Plus some other doozies.

And we'll start the year out with a few more.

at what cost?

Someone posited a question on Twitter recently asking what was the worst thing about being single; I know she was looking for emotional and non tangible reactions, but my reaction was that the worst part was the cost.

According to North American statistics (read US because Stats Can isn’t collecting data right now – don’t get me started, it’s a mess) we have officially tipped the scales and now more than 50% of households are now single. This is historically significant. It is socially significant. And it makes me wonder if finally marketers might start to consider changing the way they vend based on this new information. Read small sizes, with proportional price tags.

It’s the old mayonnaise dilemma I have about once a year when I need mayonnaise. The half-sized jar is 30 cents less than the full sized jar, but I will toss out half of the full sized jar, but it’s so much more economical to purchase the larger container. In truth I generally wait until one of them is on sale and then purchase that one. But it leads to the same question. Why am I asked to pay the same rate for half the product just because I’m single (or can’t consume the volume of product in the larger container)? The obvious answer is just to purchase the larger container on the off chance that I might consume more and then I’m not in the position of paying more, but that leads to food waste, which leads to a whole other argument about consumption and here I am still standing in the grocery aisle with a ethical dilemma over a goddamned jar of mayonnaise.

The basics and fun of life are still designed for couples, or more than one person. Rent, well other than me, who has amazingly low rent - I live as if I have roommate in terms of dollars - but for everyone else, coming up with that sum of money every month can be challenging, especially if you’re a woman and still make 30% less on average than a man for no reason that makes any sense. Vacations, while not the basics of life, are not half the cost for a single person, because most of those advertised rates and deals are based on double occupancy. And then there’s the good old ‘because female’ rationale for why things like deodorant, shampoo, razors and other genderfied items are more when you’re a woman than they are when you’re a man. Marketplace ran a show on this.

Sure there’s value in volume and in some cases it makes sense. It doesn’t cost that much more to wrap plastic around 12 rolls of toilet paper than it does 4, so it makes sense to offer it in larger packages. And let’s face it, 4 toilet rolls isn’t going to last all that long, although on the flipside, the toilet roll storage basket in my teensy little bathroom holds exactly 12 rolls, so those monster 30 packs are virtually useless to me. Sure they don’t go bad, but in my surprisingly reasonable apartment, there is very little storage space, and no place to put them until I need them. Ok, ok, I have a freezer and I can take a bigger package of say chicken and wrap it up to freeze and use later. But what if it’s something I haven’t tried and I’d like to try it once before deciding to buy a 3 month supply. Or would like to only heat up half that frozen convenience lasagna so that I won’t be eating it for the next 7 days?!

But this goes beyond marketing and consumables. Let’s talk taxes. Under Harper, a new, albeit controversial, tax break is announced for families. Great if you qualify and you have a family. Sure you’re paying for things I don’t have to consider such as educating someone other than myself, but where’s the break for me joining a gym or taking an exercise class? Only for kids you say? Hmm. They aren’t any. None. You might be able to claim some of your portion of rent under Ontario tax benefits, but so can anyone regardless of marital status. Yes, you get the same crappy education tax breaks of any student, but you aren’t able to claim yourself as a dependent and it goes on. In fact an article in The Atlantic pegged this number in the US as being over $1 Million dollars more to be single over a lifetime. Read it because the numbers are astounding.

Why are these financial penalties for being single? (Which I totally stole from an interviewer on HuffPost.) The more I read on this subject the angrier I became and if you listen to this interview you can heard the opinion of women with much more knowledge of the subject than I have. I don't have a pithy ending statement for this one. I keep trying to form a sentence about considering as a society why we revere marriage so much and why can’t we extend similar privilege to single person households too, but we need to be at a point beyond consideration and be at a point of action.  Let’s start with taxes and work backwards from there.

good on you queensland rail - also not really a post

I tripped over this completely by accident.  And I love it.  It's clear.  The language is plain.  The message is succinct.

follow up to on a more serious note - not really a post post

The good news being reported on Torontoist is that pedestrian fatalities are way down this year.  23 deaths in 2014, which is still too high but considering it was over 60 in 2013, I'm thinking we'll see a significant reduction year over year.  The trouble with observing daylight saving time is that in November gets dark early, black is the favourite colour for Canadian outerwear, which, when combined means drivers can't/don't see pedestrians. Which makes me wonder if resurrecting the purse 'hanger' attachments that were so popular a few years ago, again but with reflective elements, might be a winning idea?!