I'm counting on it.
I still subscribe to <gasp> ANALOG cable TV (Ch 1-70). No set-top box
required. I understand that, at least for a while, the Cable Pig<tm> will
continue to "pump" analog down their lines. That should give me a little
extra "breathing space" (time following the mandated cutover date) while I
save up the $$ for the purchase of digital equipment. During that time, of
course, the cost of the new technology will come down, too.
What I need to investigate is exactly what these broadcasters have in
mind for communicating emergency messages for those people who cannot
hear over the radio, like deaf and hard-of-hearing people who compose
about 10% of the population. I find it difficult to believe that the
future holds only pay-television options and nothing for free if radio
is still going to be free but totally inaccessible to a significant
segment of our population.
What do they do NOW? Why would that change at the digital broadcast cutover?
Where did you get THAT idea? Free broadcast television isn't going away just
because it is converting to digital.
For those that cannot or will not convert their existing equipment to digital,
converter boxes will be available so that their old sets will continue to
function albeit at "low" definition.
In typical government style, as if they haven't "done" enough already, it is
being debated whether or not to set up another <ahem> ENTITLEMENT program
(endless bureaucracy) for The Poor<tm> that cannot afford to upgrade their
equipment or even a converter box. Whoopee. <sigh>
Why should the blind - oops, visually impaired - be denied their inherent
right to DRIVE? Something must be done!!
Don't worry about it. Free broadcast video will CONTINUE to be accessible to
The price MIGHT be a bit high, particularly under different circumstances, but
two technicians got you warm again in a hurry.
Given that the repair was done by a (presumably) professional, reputable
company, you probably also have an implied warranty on their work. Some
monetary value must be attributed to that fact.
You could have perused the classified ads or "asked around" and found someone
that does such work "on the side" for less, but there would likely be no
warranty and the chances that the job would be done promptly and properly
If your furnace ignitor lasts through NEXT winter, I'd say you got your
money's worth on a 12-year-old furnace repair.
Unless a MAJOR component is replaced, you should not place so much emphasis on
the part or their charge for it. Grossing-up parts costs is a tradition in
the service industry and has been for years.
I'll bet that, if you had had the part already purchased and waiting for them,
their total charge would have been less, but not as much as $54 less.
I get the feeling that, even if the entire bill had been itemized, but the
BOTTOM LINE was the same, you would feel as though you had been overcharged.
That's understandable. $281 to replace a small, relatively inexpensive part
is high. If the fix lasts and you stay warm, it won't seem as high as time
Also, you can always request an ITEMIZATION of charges from any service person.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.