Smaller cable TV packages would be good for consumers, but a la carte pricing would be better

Looks like the cable industry is finally responding to the threat of cut-rate online alternatives such as YouTube and Hulu.

No, that doesn’t mean cable companies will at last allow people to pay only for the channels they want to watch and not stick them with hundreds they don’t. But it may soon mean smaller, cheaper packages that could lower your monthly bill.

Cable insiders have been telling me for months that smaller packages are in the works. Now a senior industry figure has spoken publicly about the prospect.

“It would be a good thing if we could all figure out a way to have one or more smaller packages that would be attractive to people who can’t afford bigger ones, especially if we could do it in a way that the entertainment companies are still able to finance the product,” Glenn Britt, chief executive of Time Warner Cable, told Reuters during the Allen & Co. media conference last week in Sun Valley, Idaho.

A Time Warner Cable spokesman confirmed Britt’s comment but declined to offer any specifics about what the company had in mind.

I reported in March that cable execs were weighing the possibility of packages of 40 or 50 channels rather than the 118 forced upon the average subscriber. The typical cable customer regularly watches only about 17 channels, according to Nielsen Co.

Meanwhile the cost of cable continues to soar. In April, Time Warner Cable once again jacked up rates for about 500,000 Southern California customers, after a January price increase for the rest of the company’s nearly 2 million local subscribers.

The roughly $3 monthly rate hike represented a 4% increase, or about twice last year’s inflation rate.

Now it appears that discussions about smaller packages are far enough along that a big dog like Britt can go on the record suggesting that change is in the wind.

“Obviously the marketplace is evolving,” said Brian Dietz, a spokesman for the National Cable & Telecommunications Assn., an industry group. “It’s clear that consumers have a multitude of options to watch video.”

For instance, Google-owned YouTube last week unveiled a free service called Leanback. It streams high-definition videos based on viewers’ preferences. The idea is to create a more TV-like experience, prompting people to kick back and stare at the screen for hours on end.

Meanwhile, Hulu is offering a premium service for $9.99 a month that allows subscribers to watch every episode of the current season of top shows, along with multiple seasons of other shows.

With such offerings on the ascent, more than a few cable customers are probably wondering why they’re paying $80 or more a month for dozens or even hundreds of channels they never watch.

Smaller cable packages would be a step in the right direction. But that’s not good enough.

Imagine being forced to subscribe to Field & Stream if you want the New Yorker, or being forced to buy a pair of gabardine trousers if you want blue jeans. No consumer would stand for such treatment.

So why should cable companies get away with it? So-called a la carte cable pricing is the way of the future, especially in an app-happy, iTunes world where media consumers pick and choose what they want to see and hear.

The sooner the cable industry accepts this reality, the sooner it can start genuinely competing for increasingly finicky digital subscribers.

Title compliance

Many SoCal homeowners have recently received official-looking letters from official-sounding “title compliance” agencies warning that they should have an official copy of their property deed in their possession.

This important goal, the letters state, can be accomplished for about $150.

Don’t be fooled. The letters are from private companies, not government agencies. And they’re offering to do something you can easily do yourself for about $12.

“I’m hesitant to use the word ‘scam,’ ” said Tom Pool, a spokesman for the California Department of Real Estate, “but they charge a lot for a service that actually costs very little money.”

These sorts of letters are mailed out in regular cycles by companies that scour property records looking for potential suckers. They’re typically not doing anything illegal. They’re just hoping to trick people who don’t look closely at such correspondence.

“The letters are required to say somewhere that it’s not from a government agency,” Pool said. “As long as they do that, they’re not breaking the law.”

A number of readers have sent me copies of “title compliance” letters they’ve received in recent days. One is from something called the Title Compliance Office. Another is from the Title Compliance Department.

Both letters appear at first blush to be from official sources. The fine print of one says the service “has not been approved or endorsed by any government agency.” The other says it’s not “government endorsed.”

Title Compliance Office charges $157 to obtain a copy of your property deed for you. Title Compliance Department is a relative bargain at $139.

Neither company could be reached for comment.

A spokesman for the L.A. County recorder’s office said any homeowner can request a copy of his or her deed. The first page will run you $6. Additional pages will cost $3 each. Most deeds run three pages.

More information can be obtained online at https://www.lavote.net.

David Lazarus’ column runs Tuesdays and Fridays. He also can be seen daily on KTLA-TV Channel 5. Send your tips or feedback to david.lazarus@latimes.com