rugman11: dj_spanmaster: So TWC has put a gun to the cable business model's head and said, "Do what we say, or our customers get your channel a la carte." Are they loaded? (The gun, the comments, and the negotiators, all)Not really. It's all posturing so that TWC can come out and say, "see, we wanted to give you a la carte but the networks won't let us." Don't pay attention to anything anybody says publicly in these negotiations. It's all just PR.
cameroncrazy1984: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Pay even more for something that is already free over the air? Yea, no. Both CEOs can go fark themselves with a rusty chainsaw.Showtime is free over-the-air? Where?
Blue_Blazer: If they want to start a conversation about a la carte channels, they are gonna find a lot of people who start offering to pay for exactly 5 channels, no more and no less.
Smelly McUgly: If you have Roku, the private code is BBCN, by the way.
rugman11: Southern100: But if A&E, SyFy, AMC, and others can produce original programming on 25¢ a month, I *do* have to wonder why CBS wants so much more. And keep in mind that's ONLY to the network itself - the local stations (affiliates) are apparently happy with whatever carriage fees they're getting.Well, those networks get ad revenue, too, so it's not just $.25/month. You also have to remember, though, those networks air far less content than the broadcast networks. I mean, AMC only airs about 10 original, scripted shows each year or less than 140 hours of content each year. ABC, CBS, and NBC will air that much original content in two months in the fall or spring. And when factor in how many more people watch the broadcast networks, they should be charging WAY more than the cable networks for retransmission. But the paradigm shift hasn't quite caught up yet, and they're having to go slow with the increases.
Southern100: But if A&E, SyFy, AMC, and others can produce original programming on 25¢ a month, I *do* have to wonder why CBS wants so much more. And keep in mind that's ONLY to the network itself - the local stations (affiliates) are apparently happy with whatever carriage fees they're getting.
Great Porn Dragon: Girion47: That's funny, I have Time Warner Cable internet and I still am able to get all of the CBS shows I care to watch.As I understand it, the CBS block is only in a few TWC markets (where there are CBS stations that are owned-and-operated by CBS Networks, not in markets where there are CBS stations owned and operated by other broadcast companies); basically, if you are in a TWC market where the CBS station isn't owned and operated by CBS Networks, this drama does not apply to you :D(As an aside--pretty much none of the Former Insight Markets Recently Borged By TWC would need to worry here, because none of our CBS affiliates are owned by CBS Networks--they're all owned by other companies (often Belo in ex-Insight territory). Hence, we can still get streaming CBS shows--which are being blocked in those CBS markets that ARE owned-and-operated by CBS, but not in CBS markets that are owned by the likes of Belo et al.)
Lawnchair: Ad rates aren't even good enough to produce reality-TV-rate schlock any more (and keep the executives swimming in coke and the stockholders happy), let alone quality.
bionicjoe: I used to work for the second highest rated cable company. We got bought by TWC. The difference is like night & day.TWC doesn't care about employees or customers. I work on the business side of things. They have no problem telling customers with $10,000 contracts to fark off, or wait for months for service.This is the 4th blackout of a channel we've had and every time we've received email talking about the other guys' 'outrageous' or 'ridiculous' demands. Every time. Even the TV message when you turn to Showtime uses the word outrageous.I read the annual report we were mailed. 5 things were voted on at the shareholders meeting. 4 concerned executive pay and the fifth was to allow more money to be allocated to government lobbyists. Glenn Britt was paid $15 million in 2011. He did so well that the $6.25 million bonus portion was upped to $6.44 million. He got a $1 million raise in 2012. I haven't been able to find a single person that got a 6.6% raise in the past 2 years./I miss Insight
DreamSnipers: FTA "Letting customers cherry pick the channels they want could cut revenue of media companies. Needham & Co estimated in July that the cable industry including media content providers could lose 50 percent of its revenue, about $70 billion, if the a la carte was widely adopted."And it is important that the cable companies continue to extort $70 billion from the public.
Fireproof: Some lemme get this straight: CBS wants to double the price they receive for their content.TWC says "Fark no, we'd have to raise rates."CBS: "Fine, we'll just pull our content from you, then!"Why would I feel the slightest bit sympathetic for CBS in this case?
Fubegra: Southern100: Just as companies like Cricket & MetroPCS starting forcing the big providers to start offering flat-rate cell phone pricing in order to competeI hate to break the news to you, but Cricket has been bought out by AT&T, and MetroPCS by T-Mobile. My guess is that US Cellular will be the next carrier to get borg'd; they've already pulled out of the Chicago market and sold that spectrum to Sprint. Stupidly, they've kept the naming rights to Sox Park even though they no longer serve Chicago.
Geotpf: Lawnchair: Is local news a requirement? Several world TV broadcasters in English out there on streaming and/or free-to-air satellite dish. Al Jazeera English, Jewish News One, China Central TV, NHK World, France 24, Russia Today, etc. (I may have some weird world views after all that).Interestingly, every single one of those channels, excluding Jewish News One, is a proproganda channel owned by a foreign government, and Jewish News One is obviously a religious based channel.
dj_spanmaster: If a cunning cable company were to make such a model available to customers, I would strongly consider switching back to cable. But in the meantime I'll get by on OTA, Netflix, and Hulu.
mithras_angel: I'll have to check the placeholder screen, when I get back, to see if that advice of "watch CBS.com" is still up.If I am blocked, and there's something I ~must~ watch, I'll just get one of my brothers to set up a proxy I can go through on his Comcast side of the world.
Carth: Lawnchair: For the public service component? One PBS affiliate per market would cover that niche adequatelyI don't know much about the science of terrestrial television spectrum but if you kept part of it available for PBS wouldn't that defeat the purpose of trying to open it up for other uses? I thought the difference between 1 channel and 10 wasn't that great no?Looks like according to Nielsen about 30 million Americans use OTA which is less than 10% so not many.
Southern100: mithras_angel:3) You just watch stuff on CBS.com.Can't do that. CBS blocked ALL of TWC's IPs to CBS.com. Even if you're not in a blacked out market, if you're on TWC you can't watch CBS.com.But even if you don't HAVE cable (or Fios, or UVerse, or whatever), you can. It's free for everyone. Except TWC. Just another "Fark You" CBS is giving to TWC customers.
Southern100: Carth: Has anyone on fark tried using https://aereo.com? $8 a month for all the broadcast channels on any device and free DVR seems like it might be a good sports alternative for people.Don't count on Aereo for long. If the courts don't back the providers, the content providers (ABC, NBC, FOX, CBS) are going to take their ball and go home - they're going to stop broadcasting OTA.http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2013/04/08/holy-cow-two-of -t he-big-four-tv-networks-are-considering-going-off-the-air/
Lawnchair: Is local news a requirement? Several world TV broadcasters in English out there on streaming and/or free-to-air satellite dish. Al Jazeera English, Jewish News One, China Central TV, NHK World, France 24, Russia Today, etc. (I may have some weird world views after all that).
Carth: Has anyone on fark tried using https://aereo.com? $8 a month for all the broadcast channels on any device and free DVR seems like it might be a good sports alternative for people.
mithras_angel: Girion47: That's funny, I have Time Warner Cable internet and I still am able to get all of the CBS shows I care to watch.So, this is either:1) You don't care to watch any CBS shows, and are thus unaffected, or2) Your local CBS station isn't blacked out, or3) You just watch stuff on CBS.com.2 is because Time Warner take CBS down everywhere. Just many places. Some CBS affiliates are owned by Time Warner, and those haven't gone black (or put on StarzKIDS, which can be worse).
alkhemy: Where I live, in the foothills of the San Gabriel mountains, there isn't a single station on TV or radio that I can get a clean signal from, so the only way we get TV is by cable or Dish. While a lot of the stuff I watch (not that much to be honest) is available in other ways (Netflix, Hulu Plus, iTunes, etc.) the one thing we can't get that we like is the morning news to play in the background while we're getting up in the mornings.If I could find a good reliable stream for that, I'd quite cable TV in a heartbeat!
cameroncrazy1984: Lt. Cheese Weasel: cameroncrazy1984: Lt. Cheese Weasel: Pay even more for something that is already free over the air? Yea, no. Both CEOs can go fark themselves with a rusty chainsaw.Showtime is free over-the-air? Where?No, meant just the CBS content.Okay well too bad you're not just paying for the CBS content.
Lt. Cheese Weasel: Pay even more for something that is already free over the air? Yea, no. Both CEOs can go fark themselves with a rusty chainsaw.
Enormous-Schwanstucker: Lawnchair: Lawnchair: If they charge $4 a month, they have to sign up 1/10th of the current cable households. Even that is a massive challenge. Virtually no other model is going to provide as much cash as getting 40 cents from every cable-sub household.Also, I should point out that the people the do get to pay them $4 a month aren't going to put up with 15 commercials per hour. People, joy of psychology, put up with tons of commercials on their "free" (even though they're paying $60+/month) stations.There goes another major revenue stream.When a compelling program is on a particularly commercial laden channel (wait, thats all of them) I'll tune to that channel, hit pause and go do some mundane task around the house for 45 minutes or so. I come back to the TV and rocket through the commercials. Win/win but a pita nonetheless.
GBB: CBS isn't so innocent in this mess either. Per FCC rules, TWC must continue to carry the channels during negotiation. When the screens went black, it's because CBS turned it off, not TWC. Ever since the Viacom threat a few years ago, TWC predicted that if they gave in to those demands, everyone else will follow suit when the contracts are up for renewal. Lo and behold, just about every content provider has demanded higher fees when the contract has come up for renewal.
pdieten: Besides, the cable company provides a nice program guide for the broadcast stations, and you won't get anything that nice over the air. And how would you record those channels if you wanted to?
Blue_Blazer: FTFA: "A la carte is never going to happen," BTIG analyst Rich Greenfield said. CBS added that "anyone familiar with the entertainment business knows the economics and structure of the cable industry doesn't work that way and isn't likely to for some time."Time-Warner ought to be careful here. This is a nasty can of worms they are offering to open. I currently pay about $15 dollars a month for the basic cable package that includes the major networks, C-SPAN, 2 PBS, and a bunch of garbage channels. I only really carry this for football, and I'm just too lazy to cancel it the other 7 months of the year. If they want to start a conversation about a la carte channels, they are gonna find a lot of people who start offering to pay for exactly 5 channels, no more and no less.Also:gfid: he thing is, if cable companies and dish companies keep pulling this kind of thing they're going to just speed up their demise and force Showtime and AMC and whoever happens to be next to start offering online subscriptions without going through a TV provider.And that will be a win/win/lose (win for consumers, win for the networks, lose for TWC, Dish, et al.)I think you might not realize that Time Warner Cable is a massive internet provider, and they would probably start charging for data nationwide (I still pay a flat fee for unlimited broadband in my area).
pdieten: Carth: Why would anyone in a major pay for the broadcast networks? You can get them free in HD with a small antenna.Because if you want any cable channels, having one set of programming come in via the cable box and the other via antenna will obligate you to switch the video source on your TV. There are a lot of people in this world who are not smart enough to figure out how to do that.Besides, the cable company provides a nice program guide for the broadcast stations, and you won't get anything that nice over the air. And how would you record those channels if you wanted to?
gfid: he thing is, if cable companies and dish companies keep pulling this kind of thing they're going to just speed up their demise and force Showtime and AMC and whoever happens to be next to start offering online subscriptions without going through a TV provider.And that will be a win/win/lose (win for consumers, win for the networks, lose for TWC, Dish, et al.)
Want more stories with less ads? Try
It's what the cool kids are doing.It's also how we pay the bills.
Sign up for the Fark NotNewsletter!
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2018 Fark, Inc | Last updated: May 26 2018 22:37:12
Runtime: 0.434 sec (434 ms)