There are already enough competitors for distribution of video entertainment. That effect is already baked into the pricing you see now. That's rather the point. First, people said, "Yippee the fact that landlords have to let us have satellite dishes will be the panacea we have wanted! Now we can get our content from services that serve small satellites instead of getting our content from cable!" And voila, after the early-adopter advantage expired, people went back to complaining about the prices. Then, people said, "Yippee competition from RCN, FIOS and U-Verse will be the panacea we have wanted! Now we can get our content from competitors and that will lower everyone's prices!" And voila, even in neighborhoods where Dish Network, DirecTV, RCN and FIOS all competed with Comcast, after the early-adopter advantage expired, people went back to complaining about the prices. Then people said, "Yippee cord-cutting will be the panacea we have wanted! Now we can get our content OTT!" And voila, after the early-adopter advantage expired, people are back to complaining about the prices. Why is it so difficult to recognize the pattern, that no matter what short-term disruption there is to the marketplace, the pricing always eventually goes back to what is dictated by value-based pricing?