Getting less instead of More from Melita

When will Melita start treating its subscribers well, as it should, for the money they pay? Take the most recent case, for instance; we have lost the Chelsea Channel on Sports, but Melita did not even have the decency to inform its clients about this, infuriating subscribers no end. Instead, it has been promoting Melita More, for which, of course, we have to pay extra.

On a day-to-day basis, people generally only use a few, very few, of the channels Melita offers in packages. The problem is that the packages the relaying companies are dishing out are designed, at least as seen and judged by many viewers, to favour the companies, not the consumer. Which, of course, makes commercial sense, but is this right?

Does it mean that this (the provision of packages as against selling channels separately) is the only manner in which the companies can operate at a profit? What is the situation in this regard abroad? I am sure subscribers will be only too pleased to learn exactly where we stand?

Do the Italians, for instance, pay more or less for similar packages, if there are any similar packages in the first place? Why is it not possible for someone who wants to have only two or three channels to do so at a rate that would be reasonably considered fair for such channels? Is it because it is commercially unfeasible for the company? Are there any countries where subscribers can pick and choose? And if there are, how do they do it? Is it just because they have a wider consumer-catchment area?

As you can see, I am not versed in all these technicalities but somehow it does seem to me that subscribers are getting a raw deal.

Am I the only one who has this feeling?