dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2013-11-26 14:38:29: The retransmission fees broadcasters charge pay TV operators to carry their content have been the source of increasingly obnoxious conflict the last few years resulting in all manner of content blackouts and bad behavior by both sides. ..

page: 1 · 2 · next


mixdup

join:2003-06-28
Birmingham, AL
Reviews:
·Charter

this is nuts

At what point do they start allowing customers to opt out of having these channels in their packages? Satellite providers, at the outset of satellite provided LiL, allowed you to buy or not to buy your local channels. Seems like they should get back to that. Then, I'll use my antenna in the attic to get what is broadcast and should be free.



ITALIAN926

join:2003-08-16
kudos:2

1 edit

Downward spiral

The more people that "cut the cord" and pirate, the carriage fees will increase. They cant make content on no money.

Im getting a feeling they are calculating carriage fees, and not taking into consideration future cord cutters.



TAZ

@qwest.net

Killing your own business

In totally unrelated news, "cord cutters" or "people who never had a cord to cut in the first place" to jump 130% by 2019. :P


Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
reply to ITALIAN926

Re: Downward spiral

Then I guess they need to find a better business model as the cord cutting and pirating will continue and will grow with the fees.

For anyone to suggest they will stop making content, your being very short sighted. They will do what they are in business to do and they will find a way to do it and make money. How that will look is only for us to predict, but a complete stop of content isnt it.



Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Greenwood, IN
kudos:2

1 recommendation

reply to ITALIAN926

said by ITALIAN926:

The more people that "cut the cord" and pirate, the carriage fees will increase.

As a cord cutter, I am fine with that. Have fun paying the higher bill.


jseymour

join:2009-12-11
Waterford, MI
reply to ITALIAN926

said by ITALIAN926:

The more people that "cut the cord" and pirate, ...

"Pirate?" How does one "pirate" broadcast TV?

Jim


buzz_4_20

join:2003-09-20
Limestone, ME
reply to ITALIAN926

It's a snake eating it's tail.

There's only X amount of money coming in. Maybe accept that the price is as high as the market will bear?

Just a crazy thought.



mixdup

join:2003-06-28
Birmingham, AL
reply to ITALIAN926

cord cutting is happening, but it's not as big an issue as everyone makes it out to be. If prices would stop going up at such a huge rate over inflation, there would be less cord cutting.



ITALIAN926

join:2003-08-16
kudos:2
reply to jseymour

Can of worms : " Aereo "



Corehhi

join:2002-01-28
Bluffton, SC
reply to ITALIAN926

These channels are free if you use an antenna, they are supported by commercials. Retransmit fees to have a free channel broadcasted over cable/sat which brings in more viewers which should bring in more ad revenue. All this is just greed on the part of local broadcasters. Long ago cable didn't exist and the TV stations managed to make money by simply sending out the signal for free.



ITALIAN926

join:2003-08-16
kudos:2

Theres this new invention called a " DVR" , advertisers aren't paying like they used to.



n2jtx

join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY

Antenna or Bust

I already have an antenna that I use for myself and broadcast basic for one my family members. I am ready to go 100% antenna and forget about cable. If they pull the OTA signals, then so be it. I barely have any interest in what is on TV now and I could easily give it up and stick with reruns of my favorites of the 1970's.

Program's I watch while gritting my teeth:

How I Met Your Mother (skipped last night as it looked to be a waste of time)
Two Broke Girls (a half hour of my life I will never get back)
Big Bang Theory (usually watch it if I am bored)
The Crazy Ones (Probably the only show I enjoy because of Robin Williams)
Two and a Half Men (should have been terminated along with Charlie Sheen)
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears.


Chubbysumo

join:2009-12-01
Superior, WI
reply to jseymour

Re: Downward spiral

ask that question to execs at CBS and ABC. If its available for public broadcast, it should be impossible to pirate it if it was broadcast in your area.


Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1
reply to ITALIAN926

Except for now Aereo is legal as such its not piracy.

Also Aereo does not at all harm broadcasters, If you watch a program via that system you are still subject to the advertisements during the content.

An antenna on someone's roof is no different they also do not pay retrans fees.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports


ISurfTooMuch

join:2007-04-23
Tuscaloosa, AL
reply to n2jtx

Re: Antenna or Bust

Charlie Sheen should have been terminated? Wow, that's harsh, man.



cchhat01
Dr. Zoidberg

join:2001-05-01
Elmhurst, NY
reply to TAZ

Re: Killing your own business

seems legit!


ISurfTooMuch

join:2007-04-23
Tuscaloosa, AL

More, more, more!!!

Here's the problem with the entertainment industry and businesses in general: they always want more profits, no matter what. Are economic times tough? Doesn't matter. Are there more alternatives seeking consumers' time? Doesn't matter. Are people getting stressed out over paying more and more? Doesn't matter. They simply refuse to accept the possibility that they might have to settle for less money.

Out in the real world, anyone who runs a household knows that this model simply doesn't work. You can't simply go to your boss and say, "From here on out, I'm going to require a 7% raise each year to offset the fact that I have a child now and will need to buy a new washer and dryer and renovate my house. I know that my current salary allows for these things, but I also want to be able to develop some rental property and take a nice vacation each year." Only an idiot would say something like that. We all know that we have to make do with what we make and either hope for a promotion or look for a better job. Sometimes we may end up wit a little extra in the bank, and sometimes we won't, and the best we can do is manage our money wisely. This is a lesson that businesses desperately need to learn.


armed

join:2000-10-20
Reviews:
·Charter

1 recommendation

It ain't that simple

"Granted it's no skin off of cable operators' teeth since all of those costs are passed directly on to you, increasingly in the form of below the line fees on top of the usual rate increases (also blamed on programming cost increases)."

Well that's a little over simplified. If the cable companies felt that it was nothing but a pass though cost issue then why were they trying to fight it. These retrans battles have left the cable companies bruised and always on the losing side. They have learned that they either pay retrans fees or lose customers... a lose lose for them.

A better reality is that they are becoming more aware that there is a limit to how much people will pay for television. They see the cord cutters adding up as they are driven away by higher costs, a very slow recovering economy, and developing home entertainment alternatives. Together these problems are developing a synergy that is worrisome to the cable companies.

That also begins to explain why the cable companies are separating the cost of retrans in the billing. Yes it does keep the advertised price down but another reason is to educate their customers that the price of cable has more than one driving factor.



anon_anon

@comcastbusiness.net
reply to ITALIAN926

Re: Downward spiral

If you look at the numbers, you will see that cable tv rates increases have considerably outpaced the inflation rate since the mid 1990's. I could contend even if broadband didn't exist the rate of increase would still remain the same. 6% yearly rate increases for cable have been the rule of thumb even before the word "cord cutter" was invented.


YDC

join:2007-11-13
Hewlett, NY

Even the networks are bundling

I see things a bit different than most. Once upon a time there was a channel dial. Only so many stations could possibly exist on it, period. This caused stations to provide the best content or be passed by. There was no retrans, no ESPN, no Disney Channel. We had networks.

Now when a company like CBS sees revenues slipping, they add another cable channel to their list, and push it down the throats of the cable companies with "incentives" to carry it.

Next thing you know it is bundled year after year into your contract to retransmit their content and the content itself is lack-luster.

I think all those cable channels are a weapon to force local cable companies to pay ransome. In turn, we get the bill.

End bundling on the network side, watch all those extra junk channels go away, and watch people have a choice again. Make network bundles illegal!


slow_move

join:2012-07-20
Coram, NY

Let the rates keep going up and subs keep going down

These large price increases are actually good for the market. It will force more people out of the pay market and that will force cable companies to come up with better models to survive. It could certainly help with getting smaller channel packages or a la carte channel purchases or concentrate on network upgrades for better performing bandwidth and more IP channels. Then as channels lose large numbers of subscribers they will lower prices to be able to keep advertising rates high and will also offer discounted package deals of channels.



dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
kudos:4

130%

about the amount of cord cutting going on.
cablecos really need to stop acting like their shit dont stink with all their rate hikes and below the line unfees!
--
Despises any post with strings.



jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1

Sports

There is already more than enough content out there that I will never have the opportunity to watch in my lifetime.

What I want is method to watch live sports.

A visit to my local baseball team is a 2 hour, one way trip in terrible traffic, yet I am unable to subscribe to MLB TV and watch this team play due to ridiculous blackout rules. The only option is to watch this game on a cable TV sports channel. To get this channel, I need to pay for 200 channels that I may never watch. An antenna would not help in this situation except for the rare weekend game that might get local TV coverage, that is, unless it would preempt some reality dancing or singing contest.


Mr Matt

join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Millenicom
·Embarq Now Centu..
·Comcast
·CenturyLink

Tail wagging the dog.

It was not until 1992 that TV stations were allowed to charge retransmission fees.

See this wiki: »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retransmission_consent

Allowing Broadcasters to charge retransmission fees is hypocritical. The government obviously failed to recognize that CATV systems were originally constructed to allow residents of areas where no TV Signal is available to view Broadcast TV Programming. In the past rather then charging cable systems to carry their signal, broadcasters rejoiced whenever a new CATV System went on line because there were more eyeballs to watch their commercials. These issues could be solved by prohibiting charging retransmission fees in any area where a TV signal can be received with an antenna. Unfortunately companies providing TV services whether transport or content, seem to think that subscribers have unlimited financial resources.



JasonOD

@comcast.net
reply to Kearnstd

Re: Downward spiral

said by Kearnstd:

Except for now Aereo is legal as such its not piracy.....

The jury is still our for aereo... broadcasters will get the laws changed if they have to.

At this point, the logical path is for broadcasters to move their entire value add (read primetime) offerings to CATV, leaving the OTA broadcast for news, public service, and reruns.

CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium
join:2011-08-11
NYC
kudos:2
reply to ISurfTooMuch

Re: More, more, more!!!

said by ISurfTooMuch:

Here's the problem with the entertainment industry and businesses in general: they always want more profits, no matter what.

I agree with this with one clarification... This phenomenon primarily affects publicly traded companies and is a result of

1) Companies worrying more about their stock price (and pleasing Wall St) than actually running their business

2) The current interpretation of Shareholder Primacy which dictates that business decisions should be made to maximize profits to the shareholders.

These two closely related factors cause businesses to adopt the 'exponential growth' model you describe. If profits aren't increasing it is considered a loss. Unfortunately I don't think they are going to 'learn their lesson' anytime soon. Greed has been let out of its cage and it isn't going back willingly.

elefante72

join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY
reply to jmn1207

Re: Sports

That will change. Just this morning Rogers (Canada) signed a big deal for sports broadcasting for mobile, TV, radio with no blackouts.

The average family can't afford a day out to the game today. In my area people w/ seasons' tix (Hockey) shell out thousands and split them up. So this is simply supply and demand. If a team skimps on salaries or management either they get a subsidy payment or start loosing money.

A sports team making money and going from $100m to $1b in value shouldn't be a fact of life, it should be capitalism....

Welcome to the real world...


megarock

join:2001-06-28
Catawissa, MO
Reviews:
·Charter

There is an issue...

Most customers are stupid. Sure, that's a mean thing to say but it's the truth. Here's why.

Say you're on Time Warner. The local CBS station decides to jack up it's retrans rates. Time Warner balks. CBS station yanks it's feeds from TW. Time Warner holds strong. Customers run from Time Warner to a competitor. Time Warner loses customers so they finally have to give in and jack rates.

Two months later everyone who ran off to that competitor then find out the competitor just got hit for higher fees from the same CBS station. Same things happen. So they run off to DirecTV.

Two months later everyone who ran off to DirecTV then find out the same CBS station has now come after DirecTV so they run off to Dish. Same result.

If the customers weren't so dumb they would stand strong with their provider and demand the provider make one offer - keep the rates the same or be dropped permanently. Or offer customers the chance to opt out of said channel and keep everything else.

In short - until people kick these broadcasters square in the teeth they are going to continue to demand more and more money every single year - costs the providers will have to pass off to you. There is only one villain and that is the people demanding retrans rights because - the more viewers the more ad revenue - the less viewers the less ad revenue. If you dump 20 million people on DirecTV their ad revenue will take a MASSIVE hit.

Remember who has control here. It's not the broadcaster...it's YOU.

Act like it.


ISurfTooMuch

join:2007-04-23
Tuscaloosa, AL

1 edit

1 recommendation

reply to CXM_Splicer

Re: More, more, more!!!

Excellent point. Yes, privately-owned businesses, especially small businesses, understand that. They also usually understand how to treat customers to make sure they remain customers. I've had several instances where local businesses (plumbing/heating and cooling/carpenters) have either not charged me for work or told me how to get small jobs done more cheaply than they could do them, and, when I've thanked them, they've said they value my continued business more than just making a few dollars from me in the short term. And, the thing is, when I need work done, I will definitely call these places first, and if someone asks me for a recommendation, I'll pass along these businesses' names. They've helped me out, so I'll help them out. I feel no such loyalty to the likes of AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, etc. To these corporations, all we amount to are a bunch of money dispensers, and their mission is to make us dispense as much as they can suck out of us.

EDIT: Another facet of companies seeking ever-increasing profits is that it often isn't really about profits; it's about stock appreciation. Shareholders really may not get a whole lot from a company's dividends; what they really want is for the news of increased profits to drive up the stock price so they can sell at the appropriate time. And, given that this whole thirst for profits and stock appreciation is unhealthy for a company long-term, since it can't spend the money it needs to on capital projects, you have to assume that the business will eventually run into trouble. This makes the whole affair a very long pump-and-dump scheme. Investors buy in, ride the company as hard as they can to churn out ever-increasing profits, even to its detriment, watch their stock appreciate, and sell out at the first sign of trouble. The company may suffer, and the stock price may go down, but that's the problem of the schmucks who are just buying in. And, if things get really bad, simply chop up the dying business and sell it off to other companies, either for cash or shares of their stock. Rinse and repeat.



n2jtx

join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
reply to ISurfTooMuch

Re: Antenna or Bust

No he shouldn't have but since they did, they should have ended the show. It is just getting so bad I skip it most weeks now.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears.