DryvlyneFar Beyond DrivenPremium
Regulation is needed I hate to say it, but this is the perfect example of why additional regulations are needed to keep both sides from putting, and screwing, the customer in the middle.
While I absolutely despise TWC's "roll over or get tough" PR campaign, because it is indeed disingenuous, Sinclair is doing a fair amount of PR themselves and being just a disingenuous. I've been completely disgusted to see full 30 second commercials and my local news stations imploring viewers to call TWC and complain or to find suitable alternative carriers.
At the end of the day I think the broadcasters hold all the cards. When push comes to shove, as it has in the past, TWC will come around and pony up the cash as customers start to defect for fear of losing their programming. The carriers need the broadcasters more than the broadcasters need the carriers particularly because, while limited, there are at least alternative carriers for consumers to turn to.
This time of the season is also particularly bad for TWC to be trying to take a stand with the BCS games and NFL playoffs looming. I distinctly remember a few years ago when a similar dispute caused TWC to lose all sorts of customers here where I live in OH because OSU was in the BCS National Championship game and nobody was going to chance losing their programming. I've never seen so many satellite installs done in a matter of 3-4 weeks than I did during that time.
I for one am content to let things ride out for a couple of weeks, but after that all bets are off as far as me staying with TWC especially if I don't see a decrease in my bill (which I know I won't) to reflect the loss of programming. I suspect a lot of other TWC customers feel the same as I do if they have not already switch to another carrier. The fact is most consumers are much more loyal to their programming than they are to their carrier.
said by Dryvlyne:More regulations will cost more than the negotiations themselves because now we have more lawyers and politicians involved. Let TV broadcasting get so out of hand the whole system crashes and they need to rebuild it. No bailouts are needed here, just like the rest of the bailouts really didn't help anything. Will there be consumer collateral damage? Yes, no matter which way it goes there will be, so might as well leave the politicians out of it.
I hate to say it, but this is the perfect example of why additional regulations are needed to keep both sides from putting, and screwing, the customer in the middle.
reply to Dryvlyne
The cable companies had regulation giving them the right to carry everything OTA within a 50 mile radius. They weren't happy with that so they along with ted turner sued the FCC. They won and now this is how we ended up with the rules today.
reply to Dryvlyne
said by Dryvlyne:The only bowl game on ABC is The Outback Bowl. NFL is covered with the FOX national feed agreement. I say let Sinclair suffer a bit. I've got OTA set up on my Tivo to supplement and another small antenna on the second TV. They are both picking up 6 and 28 without issue. For me, the only alternative is satellite, and it's not cheaper.
This time of the season is also particularly bad for TWC to be trying to take a stand with the BCS games and NFL playoffs looming.
I agree too, these Sinclair ads telling me to switch just aggravate the situation. I also realized while setting up the OTA, we only watch one 6/28 show on a regular basis. No real loss here.
C_Kill The SocialistsPremium
reply to fifty nine
Wow someone that actually gets it, the cable companies brought this on themselves