Well, because it will be better than the alternatives, if we want streaming video on-demand, across all devices.

The primary alternatives are:

1. Paying a la cart for "streaming rights" to individual shows and movies. This is the model Disney likes, which has Steve Jobs' fingerprints all over it (Mr. Jobs is a very large, influential Disney shareholder).

2. Paying separately at each individual site that provides premium video, such as Hulu.com, HBO.com, ESPN.com, etc.

The fact is that we, the viewers, are going to have to pay for premium video content moving forward. The economics are such that pure ad models online for premium TV and movies are simply not generating enough revenue to create sustainable businesses. That being the case, we are going to pay one way or another.

Personally, I would rather have a small, additional fee added to my cable bill to access all my TV content on-demand, across multiple websites and on any device.

The extra money I pay will actually go mostly to the content providers, not Comcast, to approximate the carriage fees they get via traditional cable distribution. This will help ensure the selection of streaming content is the actual content we want, without the glaring holes we see today on Hulu and expected in Comcast's initial rollout of its free version of TV Everywhere in Jan.

I believe the convenience, freedom, and content selection will be worth paying Comcast another $10 to $20 per month.